1 2012-07-17 00:17:10 <Fanquake> Is the forum down for anyone else?
  2 2012-07-17 00:17:28 <jine> Yep, i can confirm that it's down
  3 2012-07-17 00:17:58 <Fanquake> I can't get on mtgoxlive either..
  4 2012-07-17 00:20:41 <jgarzik> price action got everyone talking all at once
  5 2012-07-17 00:21:19 <Fanquake> The sell side has increased about 5 fold in the last half hour, over a million now...
  6 2012-07-17 00:23:37 <galambo_> itll keep rising until after the subsidy decrease and everyone remembers they still cant really do anything with it (the fundamentals have not changed)
  7 2012-07-17 00:42:21 <Karmaon> Fanquake, strange that some of my apps weren't responding hosted on SoftLayer.
  8 2012-07-17 00:42:29 <Karmaon> The forums are hosted their too.
  9 2012-07-17 00:42:38 <Karmaon> But my server is reachable and I restarted it.
 10 2012-07-17 01:41:01 <MC1984> i have a strange folder here that is currently in my recycle bin, but if i move it elsewhere it disappears from file explorer
 11 2012-07-17 01:41:15 <MC1984> but can then be seen with a specialist file viewer prog
 12 2012-07-17 01:41:26 <theymos> System file, probably.
 13 2012-07-17 01:41:31 <MC1984> the hell, is my shit rootkitted or somthing
 14 2012-07-17 01:41:56 <MC1984> its not a system file, its leftover from some program uninstalled ages ago
 15 2012-07-17 01:44:17 <theymos> Hidden, maybe.
 16 2012-07-17 01:45:53 <raad287_> hey
 17 2012-07-17 01:46:27 <raad287_> anyone try mining on an android?
 18 2012-07-17 03:03:13 <copumpkin> is there an overview of how a coinbase transaction differs from a regular one? It has a weird script with length limitations on it, it technically has no inputs (although from what I see it appears to have one input with an all-zero/-1 outpoint), and has no special limitations on outputs
 19 2012-07-17 03:03:24 <copumpkin> any other special treatment I should give it?
 20 2012-07-17 03:06:01 <luke-jr> no, it does have special limitations on outputs
 21 2012-07-17 03:06:10 <luke-jr> they cannot be spent for 100 blocks
 22 2012-07-17 03:06:27 <copumpkin> ah
 23 2012-07-17 03:06:35 <copumpkin> that makes sense
 24 2012-07-17 03:06:57 <luke-jr> not really, it's just annoying
 25 2012-07-17 03:06:59 <luke-jr> :p
 26 2012-07-17 03:07:16 <copumpkin> well, it makes sense from the other stuff I've heard about limitations of generated coins, that is
 27 2012-07-17 03:07:22 <copumpkin> not sure about fundamentally :)
 28 2012-07-17 03:07:37 <luke-jr> :p
 29 2012-07-17 03:07:41 <copumpkin> I'm trying to decide whether I want to represent coinbase as a separate type or not
 30 2012-07-17 03:07:47 <copumpkin> or whether I should roll it into my transaction type
 31 2012-07-17 03:23:14 <theymos> The format is the same.
 32 2012-07-17 03:26:42 <copumpkin> yeah, I know
 33 2012-07-17 03:26:48 <copumpkin> but the script is less meaningful as script, right?
 34 2012-07-17 03:27:00 <copumpkin> since it doesn't "do" anything
 35 2012-07-17 03:27:26 <theymos> Yeah, I don't think the input's script even has to be valid. It's limited to 100 bytes, though.
 36 2012-07-17 03:28:51 <copumpkin> yeah, the only thing I've seen in the script are a couple of pushes, ever
 37 2012-07-17 03:29:05 <copumpkin> so yeah, I'm trying to decide whether it's worth keeping it separate or not
 38 2012-07-17 03:29:12 <theymos> What are you doing?
 39 2012-07-17 03:30:01 <copumpkin> writing my own implementation, or a subset of one for some things I want to play with (and for the sake of learning the protocol's ins and outs)
 40 2012-07-17 03:30:12 <amiller> erm, just had a unifying thought
 41 2012-07-17 03:30:34 <amiller> we pick pick the longest chain because that has the highest likelihood of being what the majority prefer
 42 2012-07-17 03:31:14 <theymos> copumpkin: I'd treat them as regular transactions. That's what Bitcoin does.
 43 2012-07-17 03:31:32 <copumpkin> what is the significance of the bogus script in the coinbase?
 44 2012-07-17 03:32:07 <theymos> It's just arbitrary data. It's never evaluated.
 45 2012-07-17 03:32:27 <copumpkin> so miners just make shit up and throw it in there?
 46 2012-07-17 03:32:32 <copumpkin> within the length limits
 47 2012-07-17 03:32:58 <doublec> some of it is merge mining information
 48 2012-07-17 03:33:22 <copumpkin> so it's kind of just a blob field
 49 2012-07-17 03:33:29 <copumpkin> meaning whatever you want it to mean
 50 2012-07-17 03:33:34 <theymos> Yes. That's where Satoshi's "Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks" text went. The data necessary for merged mining also goes there, along with coinbase flags, and soon the block number (to fix a problem).
 51 2012-07-17 03:33:39 <doublec> pretty much.
 52 2012-07-17 03:34:07 <doublec> it's also where p2sh voting information went
 53 2012-07-17 03:34:20 <copumpkin> so there's no fixed format for that data, I assume?
 54 2012-07-17 03:34:29 <copumpkin> it depends on who's doing what with it
 55 2012-07-17 03:34:41 <doublec> correct
 56 2012-07-17 03:34:46 <copumpkin> [PushData "255255NULGS",PushData "EOT",PushData "The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"]
 57 2012-07-17 03:34:55 <copumpkin> there's always that 4-byte pushdata first
 58 2012-07-17 03:35:04 <copumpkin> from what I've seen
 59 2012-07-17 03:35:18 <copumpkin> where pushdata is my unified push data opcode
 60 2012-07-17 03:36:08 <theymos> I'm not sure whether that's required. I haven't seen where in the code that's enforced.
 61 2012-07-17 03:36:32 <copumpkin> so it's just that most people tend to put that in anyway?
 62 2012-07-17 03:39:33 <theymos> I guess. It might be required.
 63 2012-07-17 03:41:10 <copumpkin> alright, I'm going to keep them separate, I guess
 64 2012-07-17 03:41:15 <copumpkin> I mean not separate
 65 2012-07-17 03:41:16 <copumpkin> :P
 66 2012-07-17 03:41:41 <copumpkin> roconnor doesn't do that in his implementation, but I'll rebel against the shackles
 67 2012-07-17 03:43:47 <theymos> I actually think that the pushdata op is because the Bitcoin client uses operator<< to insert data into a script, and that automatically adds the pushdata stuff.
 68 2012-07-17 03:47:49 <copumpkin> oh :)
 69 2012-07-17 03:47:55 <copumpkin> that's kinda funny
 70 2012-07-17 03:48:05 <copumpkin> by the way, in bitcoin-qt I see an option to sign a message
 71 2012-07-17 03:48:10 <copumpkin> but no option to verify a signature
 72 2012-07-17 03:49:23 <theymos> I don't use bitcoin-qt, so I don't know about that. bitcoind can verify it.
 73 2012-07-17 03:49:45 <copumpkin> yeah, was just wondering about easily accessible verification for the masses :)
 74 2012-07-17 03:49:54 <luke-jr> copumpkin: 0.7 can verify
 75 2012-07-17 03:50:00 <copumpkin> oh, cool
 76 2012-07-17 03:59:47 <Detritus> Any one from the forums around? I see they are  backup, but I'm getting permission error when I try to log in
 77 2012-07-17 04:00:07 <copumpkin> theymos was just here 10 seconds before you asked :P
 78 2012-07-17 04:00:13 <Detritus> lol
 79 2012-07-17 04:00:15 <copumpkin> MagicalTux might know what's going on
 80 2012-07-17 04:00:46 <copumpkin> works for me, though
 81 2012-07-17 04:05:27 <Detritus> yeah, it's fine for lots of people. I've tried clearing my cache, and several different machines. All produce the same errors if I supply my correct login credentals. If a put in the wrong password then ti takes me to the standard wrong password help page
 82 2012-07-17 04:05:54 <Detritus> So I don't know what to think
 83 2012-07-17 04:08:03 <MagicalTux> still now?
 84 2012-07-17 04:08:30 <MagicalTux> works just fine for me
 85 2012-07-17 05:52:33 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened issue 1603 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/1603>
 86 2012-07-17 05:57:36 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: Diapolo opened pull request 1604 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1604>
 87 2012-07-17 07:39:49 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: laanwj opened pull request 1605 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1605>
 88 2012-07-17 08:03:43 <amiller> holy cow, bitcoin sort of rewards you for mining _off-peak_
 89 2012-07-17 08:04:08 <amiller> that's a neat stabilizing thing
 90 2012-07-17 08:22:40 <cheesecake> im about to give up on slackware when i compile bitcoin-qt from source i get src/db.h:153:24: error: class Db has no member named exists make: *** [build/main.o] Error 1
 91 2012-07-17 08:22:53 <cheesecake> i have db4.8 installed
 92 2012-07-17 08:41:26 <piuk> Is http://bitcoin.org/dos the latest unlatched ddos issue or is there another more recent one?
 93 2012-07-17 08:41:34 <piuk> *un-patched
 94 2012-07-17 08:42:32 <[Tycho]> Hello, piuk.
 95 2012-07-17 08:42:46 <piuk> Hi Tycho
 96 2012-07-17 08:43:01 <Fanquake> Looks like it says it has been reported and fixed in 0.6.2 ?
 97 2012-07-17 08:43:37 <piuk> I'm using a much older 0.5 version
 98 2012-07-17 08:44:06 <[Tycho]> piuk: will you enable multisign option again ? :)
 99 2012-07-17 08:44:07 <piuk> gavin told advise me to patch it with this commit https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/be8651dde7b59e50e8c443da71c706667803d06d
100 2012-07-17 08:44:53 <piuk> but I remember seeing another notice about a ddos vulnerability but never applied any patches
101 2012-07-17 08:45:16 <piuk> I'm having trouble with bitcoind consuming 100% CPU and 8 GB RAM
102 2012-07-17 08:46:02 <piuk> Tycho: Soon, need to finish updating the apps as well
103 2012-07-17 08:46:10 <cccp> why do you run such an old version?
104 2012-07-17 08:46:12 <[Tycho]> Cool.
105 2012-07-17 08:47:16 <kinlo> piuk: afaik there is another bug, but no info is given
106 2012-07-17 08:48:01 <kinlo> piuk: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposures will list you the details as they are available
107 2012-07-17 08:48:33 <kinlo> the patch you gave is afaik for CVE-2012-2459, while the 0.6.3 is CVE-2012-3789
108 2012-07-17 08:48:46 <piuk> thats what I was looking for thank tycho
109 2012-07-17 08:49:04 <piuk> Is it known to be exploited in the wild yet?
110 2012-07-17 08:49:29 <kinlo> if it would be I guess more info would be known
111 2012-07-17 08:49:46 <kinlo> but I don't know what the exploit is, so I can't even begin to comment
112 2012-07-17 08:50:05 <kinlo> piuk: which version of bitcoind are you using?
113 2012-07-17 08:50:40 <justmoon> <piuk> I'm using a much older 0.5 version
114 2012-07-17 08:50:44 <kinlo> ic
115 2012-07-17 08:50:53 <kinlo> piuk: there are backports from luke on the 0.5 branch
116 2012-07-17 08:51:13 <kinlo> perhaps you should rebase on the latest version of the 0.5 branch?
117 2012-07-17 08:51:13 <piuk> I need patches
118 2012-07-17 08:51:17 <[Tycho]> piuk: try visiting IRC more often. Sometimes Gavin appears here and tells what patches should be applied.
119 2012-07-17 08:51:40 <[Tycho]> My bitcoin nodes are based on much older version of bitcoind :)
120 2012-07-17 08:52:13 <kinlo> I'm trying to keep up with my bitcoins for that very reason
121 2012-07-17 08:53:59 <piuk> are you having any issues tycho?
122 2012-07-17 08:55:32 <[Tycho]> piuk: no, I'm applying patches as needed.
123 2012-07-17 08:56:13 <kinlo> [Tycho]: your mining server is build-in into the bitcoind?
124 2012-07-17 08:56:39 <[Tycho]> kinlo: well, partially. Mostly work generation and checking.
125 2012-07-17 08:57:30 <Fanquake> If anyones interested. I setup up electrum on my Raspberry Pi. Interested to know if anyone else has done anything similar, or has ideas/suggestions. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=93724
126 2012-07-17 08:58:49 <justmoon> TD: hey! :)
127 2012-07-17 08:58:52 <TD> hey there
128 2012-07-17 08:59:29 <justmoon> TD: does the readme-qt.rst build process have to work as well to get the patch accepted or just the gitian one?
129 2012-07-17 09:00:02 <TD> i don't know .... i'd guess they all have to work. the qt build works OK for me on mac and linux. what's up with the windows version?
130 2012-07-17 09:01:11 <justmoon> well, there are a bunch of tickets related to it - it's currently broken, the makefiles are wrong (#1401), the deps package is outdated, so you have to compile everything yourself (#1155), there is apparently a boost patch you need that I couldn't find (#1563)
131 2012-07-17 09:03:38 <[Tycho]> Can someone tell me what is wrong with this address ? 17FSKMPAyXGR7EQziCqbVfwleGumRosQoh
132 2012-07-17 09:04:20 <justmoon> Tycho: invalid checksum
133 2012-07-17 09:05:54 <[Tycho]> I wonder why PHP checking code doesn't detects this.
134 2012-07-17 09:06:25 <justmoon> well what's the code?
135 2012-07-17 09:16:09 <justmoon> TD: ok, so I managed to compile regular Bitcoin-Qt on windows now, I'm now going to look into cross-compiling leveldb
136 2012-07-17 09:23:25 <TD> justmoon: oh
137 2012-07-17 09:23:29 <TD> justmoon: ok, great
138 2012-07-17 09:23:37 <TD> i didn't realize some of the build files were broken ....
139 2012-07-17 09:23:49 <TD> [Tycho]: maybe the code doesn't verify the checksum correctly
140 2012-07-17 09:23:50 <TD> bbiab
141 2012-07-17 09:23:55 <justmoon> I think it's mostly gitian that matters these days
142 2012-07-17 09:24:24 <[Tycho]> TD: usually it fails when I try to change some letter.
143 2012-07-17 09:25:30 <[Tycho]> justmoon: I think it was this one - http://code.gogulski.com/bitcoin-php/class_bitcoin.html
144 2012-07-17 09:26:41 <justmoon> [Tycho]: are you calling checkAddress or just addressToHash160?
145 2012-07-17 09:27:06 <[Tycho]> checkAddress
146 2012-07-17 09:27:50 <justmoon> hmm, it definitely checks the checksum, not sure how it's possible that the one you posted passes
147 2012-07-17 09:28:16 <justmoon> how did you generate that address to begin with? using the same library or from some other source?
148 2012-07-17 09:28:46 <[Tycho]> May be my copy of code is broken... Can you try it on your machine ?
149 2012-07-17 09:29:03 <justmoon> sure one sec
150 2012-07-17 09:29:08 <[Tycho]> This address was submitted by one of my users.
151 2012-07-17 09:30:47 <justmoon> passes on my end, too - I'll debug, give me a sec
152 2012-07-17 09:46:00 <justmoon> ok, so 17FSKMPAyXGR7EQziCqbVfwleGumRosQoh base58decoded is
153 2012-07-17 09:46:02 <justmoon> 00448bb613a64368911c059b9849676cbbb37f641b5baea680 (actual)
154 2012-07-17 09:46:08 <justmoon> 00448bb613a64368911c059b9849676cbbb979ea4023aa4a80 (bitcoin-php)
155 2012-07-17 09:46:22 <justmoon> so there is something wrong with the base58 decoder in bitcoin-php
156 2012-07-17 09:46:55 <[Tycho]> Cool.
157 2012-07-17 09:47:06 <[Tycho]> But somehow it decodes other addresses...
158 2012-07-17 09:47:19 <justmoon> yeah you can see that it gets most of the address correct too
159 2012-07-17 09:50:03 <justmoon> oooooohhh
160 2012-07-17 09:50:05 <justmoon> I get it
161 2012-07-17 09:50:16 <justmoon> the address contains an invalid character, a lowercase L
162 2012-07-17 09:50:57 <kinlo> so his user probably typed the address by hand?
163 2012-07-17 09:51:03 <justmoon> it should consider that invalid, instead it processes it as -1
164 2012-07-17 09:51:10 <[Tycho]> That would be surprising.
165 2012-07-17 09:51:27 <justmoon> kinlo: no, the checksum is correct, there is more going on
166 2012-07-17 09:51:33 <theorbtwo> s/l/1/ before you decode?  Given it's 58, there should be a few other such pairs, too.  Check the spec?
167 2012-07-17 09:52:06 <justmoon> kinlo: probably somebody generated the address either knowing about the bug in bitcoin-php or accidentally
168 2012-07-17 09:52:28 <justmoon> but it would have been an implementation that also has the same "count-l-as-minus-one" bug that created the checksum
169 2012-07-17 09:53:01 <justmoon> [Tycho]: I'll do a pull request for bitcoin-php
170 2012-07-17 09:53:12 <[Tycho]> Nice idea.
171 2012-07-17 09:57:11 <kinlo> if they just did it to try to attack deepbit, they're looking really far
172 2012-07-17 09:57:21 <kinlo> but then again, a pool receives many attacks daily
173 2012-07-17 09:58:08 <[Tycho]> Well, I don't see how this may hurt deepbit. But nice try :)
174 2012-07-17 09:58:24 <theorbtwo> Somewhere in bitcoin there is a very interesting paper on personal gain vs community forming, when there are money-like rewards.
175 2012-07-17 09:58:26 <genjix> hey, the date for _posts/events/2012-07-27-berlin.md was wrong, so i moved the file to _posts/events/2012-06-27-berlin.md
176 2012-07-17 09:58:44 <genjix> it doesnt matter as the events section was commented, but it's good to be consistent anyway.
177 2012-07-17 09:59:02 <genjix> anyway send me a PM if there's any questions about that. afk now
178 2012-07-17 10:00:30 <justmoon> [Tycho]: https://github.com/mikegogulski/bitcoin-php/pull/8
179 2012-07-17 10:01:11 <[Tycho]> justmoon: thanks :)
180 2012-07-17 10:01:50 <sturles> How can I make a list of all addresses connected to the Bitcoinica thefts?  I want to make sure that if any of those coins hit me, even a transaction fee, I'm able to to return them.
181 2012-07-17 10:02:37 <kinlo> sturles: they can be washed so it is extreamly difficult to tell
182 2012-07-17 10:03:09 <sturles> I can see the coins are washed, so I want to automate the making of a list.
183 2012-07-17 10:04:09 <sturles> Every bitcoin can be traced all the way back to it's origin.  I want to see if I receive any coins which can be traced back to the theft.
184 2012-07-17 10:05:18 <kinlo> that would make it possible to hurt people, just send coins to all the adresses and they will become "infected"
185 2012-07-17 10:06:02 <theorbtwo> Is that true of every individual coin?  If coin A is sent to an address that has 999999 other coins in it, can you tell if you got A, or one of the 999999 non-evil coins?
186 2012-07-17 10:06:20 <sturles> Of course, and so what?  If I am one of the recipients, I want to refund the coins.  Is that so bad?
187 2012-07-17 10:06:59 <sturles> theorbtwo: It doesn't matter.
188 2012-07-17 10:07:21 <sturles> theorbtwo: I know I got coins from a tainted address.
189 2012-07-17 10:07:28 <theorbtwo> sturles: OK.
190 2012-07-17 10:08:29 <[Tycho]> Strange approach...
191 2012-07-17 10:09:28 <[Tycho]> So if this taint will spread enough you will send all your incoming payments to the victim ?
192 2012-07-17 10:10:44 <justmoon> if a few major sites start checking for the taint that might cause everyone else to want to check to so they don't end up accepting tainted coins
193 2012-07-17 10:11:01 <justmoon> it's pretty theoretical right now, but you could see how this might happen one day and spread pretty quickly
194 2012-07-17 10:11:14 <justmoon> before you know it, nobody wants tainted coins
195 2012-07-17 10:11:51 <theorbtwo> OTOH, it's also an interesting way of mucking with the basic assumptions of number of coins available over time, which bitcoin was designed to be resistant to.
196 2012-07-17 10:12:35 <theorbtwo> Also, how do you avoid taint?  There's no way that I see to verify that other people are acting in accordance with this, so even if you return tained coins to a blessed address, you are tainted anyway.
197 2012-07-17 10:13:48 <justmoon> re: "If coin A is sent to an address that has 999999 other coins in it, can you tell if you got A, or one of the 999999 non-evil coins?" - you can tell coins apart that have been joined at an address as long as they haven't been joined into a single transaction
198 2012-07-17 10:14:03 <[Tycho]> sturles: actually yes, it's bad.
199 2012-07-17 10:14:20 <justmoon> a mixing service would obviously join coins from different people into single transactions for just that reason
200 2012-07-17 10:16:29 <sturles> [Tycho]: Not all.  If I receive 100 BTC from an address tainted with one coin, I'll return one coin.
201 2012-07-17 10:16:55 <sturles> AFAIK MtGox already checks for tainted coins.
202 2012-07-17 10:17:10 <theorbtwo> justmoon: That'd remove most of my objections, then.
203 2012-07-17 10:17:14 <sturles> Requires identity check if you deposit tainted coins.
204 2012-07-17 10:18:52 <justmoon> theorbtwo: imho your objection stands, as I said, you can always combine coins from different people into a single output, so everything you said still applies
205 2012-07-17 10:19:15 <gmaxwell> sturles: they basically require identity check from everyone, just lazily... and they appear use a bunch of criteria to decide to bump up when they require it from you... including accessing via proxies, or depositing coins with an atypical theft density.
206 2012-07-17 10:19:22 <justmoon> just s/address/output/, so sturles should be asking for a list of tainted outputs, not tainted addresses
207 2012-07-17 10:23:13 <sturles> Possibly.  Addresses are useful because I can alert the seller if I buy coins which are sent from a tainted address.  The seller can then investigate where the coins came from.
208 2012-07-17 11:01:07 <Eliel_> sturles: There's one gotcha you haven't considered I think. If people start doing what you describe, people will start faking their coins being stolen.
209 2012-07-17 11:05:09 <epscy> taint can never be more than an indicator
210 2012-07-17 11:05:10 <sturles> I'm not going to return a single satoshi unless I trust the coins were actually stolen.
211 2012-07-17 11:05:18 <epscy> due to the nature of bitcoin
212 2012-07-17 11:06:06 <sturles> Taint means the address has received stolen coins.  The owner of the addrss should know where the stolen coins came from, and may be able to help with further investigation.  Follow the coins.
213 2012-07-17 11:08:04 <[Tycho]> sturles: so you will lose that part of payment ?
214 2012-07-17 11:08:54 <epscy> sturles: but you don't need to give permission to recieve coins
215 2012-07-17 11:09:03 <epscy> so you may not know where they have come from
216 2012-07-17 11:09:15 <epscy> the problem is the coins getting stolen
217 2012-07-17 11:09:26 <epscy> fix that and everything else goes away
218 2012-07-17 11:11:31 <sturles> epscy: You are overcomplicating things which are normally not.
219 2012-07-17 11:12:14 <epscy> no, i think you are
220 2012-07-17 11:12:39 <sturles> [Tycho]: I will either ask the other party to cooperate in finding the thief, or I'll probably just return the funds and cancel the deal.
221 2012-07-17 11:13:46 <[Tycho]> Oh, I was thinking that you are planning to return those coins to the victim.
222 2012-07-17 11:13:47 <sturles> epscy: If I get a random payment of stolen funds without any known source, I'll of course just return the funds tho their owner.  I don't see the problem?
223 2012-07-17 11:14:04 <[Tycho]> So this is a VERY bad idea and this will hurt Bitcoin.
224 2012-07-17 11:14:08 <epscy> yes but will the person you are transacting with do the same?
225 2012-07-17 11:14:12 <epscy> and actually
226 2012-07-17 11:14:16 <BlueMatt> the issue is, if you come in contact with the stolen funds, the cops may not look too well on doing anything with them
227 2012-07-17 11:14:16 <epscy> will you check that?
228 2012-07-17 11:14:25 <epscy> every time you recieve btc?
229 2012-07-17 11:14:31 <sturles> [Tycho]: This is the goal, yes.  Depends on how I get them.  It may be just a transaction fee.
230 2012-07-17 11:14:58 <sturles> epscy: Of course!
231 2012-07-17 11:15:00 <epscy> BlueMatt: so it is easy to screw people over then
232 2012-07-17 11:15:00 <[Tycho]> And "canceling the deal" may look like scam sometimes.
233 2012-07-17 11:15:08 <epscy> just send them some tainted coins
234 2012-07-17 11:15:24 <epscy> in fact just claim your own coins were stolen
235 2012-07-17 11:15:30 <epscy> and send them to somebody
236 2012-07-17 11:15:36 <[Tycho]> All coins are equal and users don't have to check them before sending to anyone.
237 2012-07-17 11:15:44 <epscy> you don't actually have to get any real stolen coins
238 2012-07-17 11:15:54 <BlueMatt> epscy: thats a possible issue for everything, and thats why laws are written to deal with that, bitcoin is no different
239 2012-07-17 11:16:20 <BlueMatt> a: "my n is stolen" b: "i was given that n"
240 2012-07-17 11:16:26 <epscy> great, we will all need lawyers...
241 2012-07-17 11:16:27 <BlueMatt> doesnt matter if its bitcoin or a parrot
242 2012-07-17 11:16:30 <sturles> If you want to taint yourself, just send them tainted coins.  If you receive tainted coins from an unknown source, e.g. it suddenly appears in your transaction list, you don't lose anything by returning them.
243 2012-07-17 11:16:52 <epscy> sturles: who decides what coins are tainted?
244 2012-07-17 11:16:56 <epscy> and why?
245 2012-07-17 11:16:58 <sturles> I do.
246 2012-07-17 11:17:12 <epscy> heh ok
247 2012-07-17 11:17:19 <epscy> i hope you do due diligence
248 2012-07-17 11:17:31 <epscy> and investigate every report of stolen coins fully
249 2012-07-17 11:17:41 <sturles> Because the coins are stolen.  I mentioned the Bitcoinica funds, didn't I.  The coins are stolen, and a police report has been filed.
250 2012-07-17 11:17:56 <Eliel_> sturles: so, how would you untaint an address (as in detect that the coins were returned)?
251 2012-07-17 11:17:59 <BlueMatt> epscy: or just get the police report...
252 2012-07-17 11:18:04 <epscy> oh ok, so you only care about big thefts
253 2012-07-17 11:18:19 <sturles> Eliel_: By returning them to an "untaint" address belonging to the rightful owner.
254 2012-07-17 11:18:50 <epscy> the point is it is concievable that the bitcoinica funds will end up in the wallets of people who had nothing to do with the theft
255 2012-07-17 11:19:10 <epscy> they may be several links away from the thief
256 2012-07-17 11:19:12 <sturles> epscy: Please don't just make up something and present it as my intentions.  I never said thet.
257 2012-07-17 11:19:14 <BlueMatt> the point is it is concievable that the cash from a recent bank robbery will end up in the wallets of people who had nothing to do with the theft
258 2012-07-17 11:19:16 <unclemantis> i have the converting Satoshi to BTC decimal down pat. How do I do the reverse? Convert decimal to Satoshi? example. 1.25 is 125000000 satoshi
259 2012-07-17 11:19:50 <sturles> epscy: Of course!  Which is why I want to follow the coins.
260 2012-07-17 11:19:59 <epscy> BlueMatt: yup
261 2012-07-17 11:20:07 <Eliel_> sturles: the problem with what you're proposing is that there's no way, aside from just trusting the person whose coins were stolen, to verify that they actually were stolen.
262 2012-07-17 11:20:54 <unclemantis> number mind, i figured it out
263 2012-07-17 11:20:59 <BlueMatt> epscy: I really fail to see how any of this is a problem, you can't say people shouldn't be checking coins to see if they are stolen, if they didn't it would be possible that they get screwed in court
264 2012-07-17 11:21:14 <epscy> it doesn't matter really, anyone who seriously follows taint is going to fail to do business with bitcoin
265 2012-07-17 11:21:20 <sturles> If someone robs an ATM, the coins will get paint stains.  If people don't check the bills when they receive them, they will end up using bills with paint stains.  And the police will be very interested.  It is in everybodys interest to check that your bills don't have large purple stains of paint.
266 2012-07-17 11:21:23 <unclemantis> btc * 100,000,000
267 2012-07-17 11:21:30 <BlueMatt> epscy: so whether you like it or not, doing due diligence on coins you receive as an exchange (and possibly further) is legally required
268 2012-07-17 11:21:52 <BlueMatt> epscy: aml are strict as fuck
269 2012-07-17 11:21:59 <epscy> yes
270 2012-07-17 11:22:03 <epscy> and gox do that
271 2012-07-17 11:22:08 <sturles> Eliel_: So you basically claim that the whole Bitcoinica story is fake.  Everyone have all their balance intact?
272 2012-07-17 11:22:12 <epscy> but they don't rely on it solely
273 2012-07-17 11:22:13 <BlueMatt> (unless you're hsbc ;) )
274 2012-07-17 11:22:20 <Eliel_> sturles: I'm not making any claims on any specific case.
275 2012-07-17 11:22:29 <epscy> because rocking up with tainted coins doesn't mean you stole them
276 2012-07-17 11:22:37 <epscy> and the fact you seem to be overlooking
277 2012-07-17 11:22:43 <epscy> is that bitcoin is global
278 2012-07-17 11:22:46 <BlueMatt> epscy: ofc it doesnt no one said that
279 2012-07-17 11:22:58 <Eliel_> sturles: for my argument, it does not matter if bitcoinica story is fake or not.
280 2012-07-17 11:23:08 <epscy> there is no police who have juristiction
281 2012-07-17 11:23:11 <BlueMatt> epscy: yes, last I checked most financial institutions are global - and still have to follow all relevant laws
282 2012-07-17 11:23:11 <sturles> Eliel_: Yes, you are.  "the problem with what you're proposing is that there's no way, aside from just trusting the person whose coins were stolen, to verify that they actually were stolen." The only specific case I have referred to is the Bitcoinica case.
283 2012-07-17 11:23:17 <BlueMatt> epscy: wtf?
284 2012-07-17 11:23:21 <BlueMatt> epscy: you are kidding right?
285 2012-07-17 11:23:36 <epscy> no
286 2012-07-17 11:23:57 <Eliel_> sturles: if what you're becomes widely accepted standard practise, the general case matters very much.
287 2012-07-17 11:24:02 <BlueMatt> if Im doing business in the us in bitcoin, the us cops have jurisdiction
288 2012-07-17 11:24:02 <epscy> dollars are hard to smuggle internationally
289 2012-07-17 11:24:06 <epscy> bitcoins aren't
290 2012-07-17 11:24:22 <epscy> BlueMatt: and the person pays you in bitcoin
291 2012-07-17 11:24:23 <BlueMatt> uhh...no dollars are easy to send between countries
292 2012-07-17 11:24:25 <epscy> they live in africa
293 2012-07-17 11:24:33 <BlueMatt> so what? I still have to follow US aml
294 2012-07-17 11:24:33 <epscy> and their coins are tainted
295 2012-07-17 11:24:43 <epscy> and the US police go... "herp derp"
296 2012-07-17 11:24:44 <BlueMatt> interpol?
297 2012-07-17 11:24:52 <sturles> epscy: Yes, bitcoin is global.  Local laws apply.  In my country the law forbids buying or selling stolen property.
298 2012-07-17 11:25:08 <BlueMatt> epscy: you clearly dont understand how jurisdiction works
299 2012-07-17 11:25:13 <epscy> sturles: theoretically yes, local laws apply
300 2012-07-17 11:25:28 <BlueMatt> no, not theoretically, in practice
301 2012-07-17 11:25:28 <Eliel_> sturles: so, if you do it now, for bitcoinica case, it'll be difficult to justify not doing it for future cases too. Regardless of whether or not your believe they're real thefts.
302 2012-07-17 11:25:37 <sturles> epscy: And I'm more concerned by the law than if the local police are able to find me or not.
303 2012-07-17 11:25:43 <epscy> in practice it will be very hard to apply this kind of law to bitcoin
304 2012-07-17 11:26:04 <BlueMatt> epscy: uhhhh...no it wont
305 2012-07-17 11:26:04 <sturles> Eliel_: No.
306 2012-07-17 11:26:07 <coiax> [B[B14:24 < epscy> in practice it will be very hard to apply this kind of law to  bitcoin
307 2012-07-17 11:26:11 <coiax> Shit, sorry
308 2012-07-17 11:26:15 <coiax> Stupid middle mouse button
309 2012-07-17 11:26:38 <epscy> yeah i think this is moral argument for some of you, reality is won't place nice with it
310 2012-07-17 11:26:58 <BlueMatt> no, this isnt a moral argument for anyone here afaik
311 2012-07-17 11:27:09 <BlueMatt> this is a "Im gonna protect my ass so I dont end up in jail" argument
312 2012-07-17 11:27:29 <helo> i.e. avoid accepting bitcoin
313 2012-07-17 11:27:31 <epscy> well if that is seriously a problem then bitcoin is dead imho
314 2012-07-17 11:27:45 <epscy> someone can send you coins
315 2012-07-17 11:27:49 <epscy> and you end up in jail
316 2012-07-17 11:27:53 <BlueMatt> its a problem for all currencies and financial institutions, but I dont think dollars are dead
317 2012-07-17 11:28:00 <epscy> BlueMatt: what is your address?
318 2012-07-17 11:28:06 <helo> i used to own all bitcoin, and everybody stole it from me. please don't accept any bitcoin, as it was all stolen from me.
319 2012-07-17 11:28:08 <epscy> i want to send you some coin
320 2012-07-17 11:28:15 <epscy> and then i am going to report them stolen
321 2012-07-17 11:28:21 <epscy> and get a police report
322 2012-07-17 11:28:41 <BlueMatt> sturles: what are you watching for stolen coins on anyway?
323 2012-07-17 11:29:54 <helo> the sender chooses which coins to send, so the recipient doesn't really have much they can do aside from delete their private keys?
324 2012-07-17 11:30:13 <sturles> BlueMatt: What do you mean?
325 2012-07-17 11:31:08 <BlueMatt> epscy: again, I think you are failing to understand that what you are saying is also possible for dollars or really any object, if it were such a big problem, holding any good would be too much of a threat...but let me remind you that there have been cases of convictions over stolen digital goods, so whether you like it or not, if you are holding stolen goods and cant prove that you received them and didnt steal them yourself, you could get
326 2012-07-17 11:31:13 <epscy> helo: but apparently they are obligated to check everything they recieve against the centralized list of bitcoin thefts and send the coins back if they are tainted....
327 2012-07-17 11:31:19 <BlueMatt> sturles: what site do you run that you are doing this on?
328 2012-07-17 11:31:22 <helo> ahh "send it back"
329 2012-07-17 11:31:34 <BlueMatt> no, you arent obligated to send it back
330 2012-07-17 11:31:41 <BlueMatt> it depends on your local regulations
331 2012-07-17 11:31:49 <BlueMatt> but, usually, you should be returning the coins to the cops
332 2012-07-17 11:32:02 <epscy> BlueMatt: i would hope the burden of proof is quite high
333 2012-07-17 11:32:09 <BlueMatt> thats up to the cops
334 2012-07-17 11:32:15 <BlueMatt> and local regulations
335 2012-07-17 11:32:30 <BlueMatt> (and, yes, usually the burden of proof is high)
336 2012-07-17 11:32:36 <epscy> hopefully if i stuffed some stolen dollars through your letterbox whilst you were out you would get sent to prison
337 2012-07-17 11:32:46 <epscy> would not
338 2012-07-17 11:32:52 <epscy> but who can say
339 2012-07-17 11:32:58 <epscy> the US is a messed up place
340 2012-07-17 11:33:02 <epscy> glad i don't live there
341 2012-07-17 11:33:58 <BlueMatt> ofc not, and ofc you wouldnt be sent to prison for getting stolen bitcoin sent to your address randomly, but if you sell goods to someone paying with stolen objects, you could get screwed for aml if you cant give the cops some lead to go on
342 2012-07-17 11:34:16 <BlueMatt> whether you like it or not, thats the way it is
343 2012-07-17 11:34:46 <BlueMatt> doesnt matter what you think of "this will kill bitcoin" or "this isnt right" or whatever, it really doesnt matter...all that matters is what the law says here and what you have to follow
344 2012-07-17 11:35:00 <epscy> the point i am trying to make, is that even if you get coins directly from the thief
345 2012-07-17 11:35:07 <BlueMatt> if it kills bitcoin, then in a year or two, bitcoin will be dead, ok
346 2012-07-17 11:35:12 <epscy> plausible deniability is high
347 2012-07-17 11:35:28 <epscy> i don't know officer
348 2012-07-17 11:35:35 <epscy> someone just sent them to me
349 2012-07-17 11:35:44 <epscy> prove that isn't the case
350 2012-07-17 11:35:46 <BlueMatt> plausible deniability is high for most most stolen goods, but you still have to pay attention
351 2012-07-17 11:35:47 <helo> s/officer/judge/
352 2012-07-17 11:36:00 <BlueMatt> go look at the lengths pawn shops go to to document where they get all their stuff, etc
353 2012-07-17 11:36:19 <BlueMatt> and if they didnt pay attention, they would get fucked all the time
354 2012-07-17 11:36:23 <BlueMatt> thats just the way it is
355 2012-07-17 11:38:02 <sturles> BlueMatt: I trade hundreds, sometimes thousands of coins every week here on IRC.
356 2012-07-17 11:38:05 <BlueMatt> even regular merchants get fucked...what was the case where a used car saleswomen was just selling cars to people and happened to sell several cars to a gang who was paying for them using drug money....the lady ended up with min sentencing of several years in jail for doing nothing more than selling cars
357 2012-07-17 11:38:25 <BlueMatt> (ok, she ended up getting a presidential pardon, but still...)
358 2012-07-17 11:38:32 <helo> sturles: guilty!
359 2012-07-17 11:38:33 <BlueMatt> IIRC
360 2012-07-17 11:39:16 <sturles> helo: ?
361 2012-07-17 11:40:00 <helo> sturles: i'm sure there's some crime you could be charged for with enough scrutiny :)
362 2012-07-17 11:40:52 <BlueMatt> epscy: let me make this clear: I agree its not necessarily good for bitcoin because it could end up causing issues for innocent people, but its also not good for bitcoin to make it even easier to trade stolen funds and launder those into other goods, so whether we like it or not, people have to pay attention to crap like that and watch for it
363 2012-07-17 11:41:10 <sturles> helo: Why?
364 2012-07-17 11:43:18 <justmoon> BlueMatt: are you running an automated builder against mike's leveldb branch?
365 2012-07-17 11:43:31 <BlueMatt> no...jenkins is down :(
366 2012-07-17 11:43:34 <BlueMatt> why?
367 2012-07-17 11:44:02 <justmoon> I'm working on making leveldb work on windows - it'd be helpful to get a link to that builder when it's back up
368 2012-07-17 11:44:50 <BlueMatt> might be a while... (but I did provide a tar.xz that you can untar on ubuntu and xcompile bitcoin for windows very easily with, if you want that)
369 2012-07-17 11:44:52 <epscy> there are two issues which make this different from dollars
370 2012-07-17 11:45:08 <epscy> 1) trusting that coins are actually stolen
371 2012-07-17 11:45:13 <justmoon> BlueMatt: that'd be helpful, yeah!
372 2012-07-17 11:45:23 <BlueMatt> epscy: yep, they are very different from dollars, but what bitcoin isnt different from are other digital goods such as money in rpgs
373 2012-07-17 11:45:26 <helo> sturles: i'm just joking really, but with the plethora of laws i wouldn't be surprised if most people who trade bitcoin on a regular basis have violated some of them
374 2012-07-17 11:45:30 <BlueMatt> (which, btw, have been successfully prosecuted)
375 2012-07-17 11:45:38 <epscy> 2) juristiction, coins can be stolen in the US, spent in africa and then sent back to the US
376 2012-07-17 11:45:40 <helo> BlueMatt: how do you tell if bitcoin has been stolen?
377 2012-07-17 11:46:15 <BlueMatt> helo: thats up to the person reporting the theft and local laws
378 2012-07-17 11:46:20 <epscy> those two things are going to make it extremely difficult for most bitcoin thefts to be resolved
379 2012-07-17 11:46:46 <BlueMatt> epscy: again, 1) is for local authorities to address, and 2) doesnt matter
380 2012-07-17 11:47:02 <epscy> i will concede that an entity in the US that regularly receives stolen coins from people in the US may have trouble with the authorities
381 2012-07-17 11:47:17 <helo> BlueMatt: what is it that everyone who receives bitcoin must do to satisfy that they weren't complicit in receiving stolen goods?
382 2012-07-17 11:47:19 <sturles> helo: I even report my bitcoins to the tax authorities.  They have not yet figured ot what it is, so I don't pay any taxes for them. :-)
383 2012-07-17 11:47:24 <epscy> but it is unlikely to be productive in any way due to 2)
384 2012-07-17 11:47:57 <epscy> i think you guys are seriously underestimating the hassle to keeping track of taint
385 2012-07-17 11:48:05 <epscy> ok i received some coins
386 2012-07-17 11:48:14 <epscy> how do i know if they are stolen or not?
387 2012-07-17 11:48:26 <epscy> do i check with every police authority in the world?
388 2012-07-17 11:48:34 <epscy> or just my local one
389 2012-07-17 11:48:39 <upb> you must check with the Stolen The Gathering Verification Exchange
390 2012-07-17 11:48:41 <upb> STGVX
391 2012-07-17 11:48:54 <BlueMatt> justmoon: magnet:?xt=urn:btih:2431d5f3c993122e80f9f94c957806b2c9e24905&dn=ubuntu.tar.xz&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.publicbt.com%3A80
392 2012-07-17 11:48:55 <epscy> what if they are reported stolen after i have received and spent them?
393 2012-07-17 11:49:04 <justmoon> BlueMatt: thanks!
394 2012-07-17 11:49:21 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, still no luck finding that bug in bitcoinjs?
395 2012-07-17 11:49:24 <BlueMatt> now if genjix or luke-jr would help me seed again
396 2012-07-17 11:49:37 <SomeoneWeird> been looking myself, cant seem to find anything
397 2012-07-17 11:49:38 <sturles> epscy: Do you often receive boins randomly from people you don't have a single piece of information about?
398 2012-07-17 11:49:49 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: it's not happening for me anymore >.<
399 2012-07-17 11:49:53 <epscy> sturles: me? no
400 2012-07-17 11:50:02 <SomeoneWeird> :O why?
401 2012-07-17 11:50:19 <epscy> might be better to ask that question to someone who is selling vps or vpn for bitcoin
402 2012-07-17 11:50:28 <BlueMatt> epscy: I dont care how hard it is to keep track of taint, or how hard it is to follow coins between countries, or how hard any part of it is, its the law and you have to comply
403 2012-07-17 11:50:39 <justmoon> I think it depends on the order that dependencies are included whether the circular dependency gets resolved or results in an undefined class
404 2012-07-17 11:50:40 <epscy> ok robocop
405 2012-07-17 11:50:49 <sturles> epscy: Not many people do.  Most people receiving stolen goods are able to revel something, a little piece of the puzzle, about where the coins came from.
406 2012-07-17 11:51:02 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: where are you getting it - in the test suite or just when running the daemon?
407 2012-07-17 11:51:07 <epscy> i can believe that about dollars
408 2012-07-17 11:51:18 <epscy> i think bitcoin is and will be very different though
409 2012-07-17 11:51:40 <sturles> Even those selling VPN for bitcoin usually have an email address, IP of people logging in and access to information on the server.
410 2012-07-17 11:51:46 <BlueMatt> Im not trying to compare with dollars, Im trying to compare with other digital goods
411 2012-07-17 11:51:57 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, var b = require('bitcoinjs'); works fine, but i get it when i try to create a node
412 2012-07-17 11:52:02 <BlueMatt> which can be reported stolen, can be tracked down, and have been successfully prosecuted before
413 2012-07-17 11:52:15 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: ic, can you put your exact script on pastebin?
414 2012-07-17 11:52:26 <SomeoneWeird> lol
415 2012-07-17 11:52:29 <BlueMatt> justmoon: does bitcoinjs have a webwallet example built-in
416 2012-07-17 11:52:46 <justmoon> BlueMatt: https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-gui
417 2012-07-17 11:52:59 <BlueMatt> does anyone run one for public use?
418 2012-07-17 11:53:13 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, http://pastie.org/private/2yxloqf33fgl9kublxq
419 2012-07-17 11:53:27 <helo> BlueMatt: i think the law takes the difficulty of determining whether received goods are stolen into account... if you did not have any reason to believe the goods were stolen, how can you get into trouble?
420 2012-07-17 11:53:31 <SomeoneWeird> updated to latest git btw
421 2012-07-17 11:53:40 <BlueMatt> helo: absolutely it does
422 2012-07-17 11:53:41 <justmoon> BlueMatt: no, but you can use trucoin's exit node and just set that in config/config.js
423 2012-07-17 11:54:03 <BlueMatt> helo: at least in the us, I believe you have to pretty thoroughly prove it was stolen
424 2012-07-17 11:54:04 <justmoon> then you pretty much just have to clone the repository change that one file and it should work
425 2012-07-17 11:54:16 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: thx
426 2012-07-17 11:55:18 <BlueMatt> justmoon: btw, once you've gotten that tar, untar to /home/ubuntu (no need to make a user) cd to bitcoin, git reset --hard to whatever repo you want, ../qmake-script.sh && make
427 2012-07-17 11:55:20 <justmoon> jeremias: got your email, when did you test it? i just did a fix a couple of minutes ago
428 2012-07-17 11:55:24 <BlueMatt> (I think)
429 2012-07-17 11:55:31 <jeremias> justmoon: I'll try again
430 2012-07-17 11:55:34 <justmoon> BlueMatt: ok, thanks
431 2012-07-17 11:55:49 <BlueMatt> oh, but install wine + mingw first
432 2012-07-17 11:55:49 <jeremias> hmm repo is up to date
433 2012-07-17 11:55:58 <justmoon> jeremias: it was a change to the node, not the repo
434 2012-07-17 11:56:07 <justmoon> BlueMatt: got it
435 2012-07-17 11:56:15 <jeremias> ok, I'll try again
436 2012-07-17 11:56:29 <BlueMatt> (and you may need to change prefixes to the compiler depending on which version of mingw you use, but it should be moderately obvious if you edit the qmake-script)
437 2012-07-17 11:56:31 <epscy> thing is, due to 2), it is very easy to "wash" coins
438 2012-07-17 11:56:41 <BlueMatt> epscy: thats why aml exist
439 2012-07-17 11:56:46 <epscy> what is aml?
440 2012-07-17 11:56:54 <BlueMatt> anti-money-laundering laws
441 2012-07-17 11:56:54 <SomeoneWeird> anti money laundering
442 2012-07-17 11:57:11 <epscy> yeah, i think they are going to struggle with bitcoin
443 2012-07-17 11:57:27 <BlueMatt> they struggle with any digital goods, but that doesnt mean they dont apply
444 2012-07-17 11:57:46 <epscy> quite
445 2012-07-17 11:57:47 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, if you need any help debugging just ping me
446 2012-07-17 11:57:49 <justmoon> BlueMatt: I haven't tested the bitcoinjs-gui in a while, so let me know if it works - also: the trucoin exit node is non-ssl at the moment, will hopefully be fixed again soon (certificate issues)
447 2012-07-17 11:57:50 <BlueMatt> if you are doing a big business of any kind, you still need to ask a lawyer about which laws may apply to you
448 2012-07-17 11:58:11 <helo> if you can see that some coin you received was stolen 30 inputs and 100 blocks ago, is it stolen?
449 2012-07-17 11:58:36 <BlueMatt> justmoon: I was asking mostly to see if anyone ran an open-source backed webwallet, Id really like to see one that supports multisig because that would be awesome, but...
450 2012-07-17 11:59:08 <epscy> helo: exactly
451 2012-07-17 11:59:18 <epscy> eventually all coins will be stolen
452 2012-07-17 11:59:32 <epscy> and determining the "level of taint" is not an exact science
453 2012-07-17 11:59:47 <BlueMatt> helo: inal, but afaik, the law says yes
454 2012-07-17 11:59:47 <epscy> because it involves people transacting with each other
455 2012-07-17 11:59:47 <justmoon> BlueMatt: define "supports multisig"
456 2012-07-17 12:00:02 <BlueMatt> justmoon: ie requires confirmation from local node and webwallet both to send
457 2012-07-17 12:00:55 <BlueMatt> anywhoo, I think we've beaten this issue to death, in the end its up to individuals and how much risk they want to take...in any case ask a lawyer (plus bernake is gonna speak soon, and I wanna see this)
458 2012-07-17 12:01:41 <justmoon> BlueMatt: hmm, is there a protocol yet for two nodes to sign something together? I don't like coming up with my own protocols because they tend to get ignored, then somebody else invents the same thing and everybody uses that
459 2012-07-17 12:01:50 <BlueMatt> justmoon: nope
460 2012-07-17 12:01:54 <BlueMatt> or...not afaik
461 2012-07-17 12:02:10 <BlueMatt> there has been some work on making one, but not that is very far afaik
462 2012-07-17 12:02:25 <justmoon> actually, I think yellowhat was working on that at the hackathon
463 2012-07-17 12:02:40 <BlueMatt> oh, hmm...well thats quite possible
464 2012-07-17 12:02:49 <gavinandresen> justmoon: https://gist.github.com/2217885  organized my high-level thoughts on multiple devices signing something
465 2012-07-17 12:03:25 <justmoon> gavinandresen: just opened the link - already loving the headlines :P
466 2012-07-17 12:05:46 <justmoon> gavinandresen: btw, if you want web wallets to be able to verify/resolve aliases then they need to be HTTP(S) based, not DNS-based :)
467 2012-07-17 12:06:37 <gavinandresen> justmoon: good point.
468 2012-07-17 12:07:07 <MagicalTux> justmoon: why not ?
469 2012-07-17 12:07:38 <justmoon> gavinandresen: TD recently mentioned the idea of adding web socket support to bitcoin-qt - if that ever happens, I'll write an SPV web wallet ;)
470 2012-07-17 12:07:46 <BlueMatt> hey, a MagicalTux on -dev, wow thats been a while
471 2012-07-17 12:07:56 <justmoon> MagicalTux: because I can't read raw DNS in the browser? or am I missing something?
472 2012-07-17 12:09:10 <BlueMatt> yuck...lawyers...
473 2012-07-17 12:09:39 <yellowhat> someone called?. i was working on multisig-TX for bitcoinj
474 2012-07-17 12:09:54 <BlueMatt> how far did you get/do you have public code?
475 2012-07-17 12:10:25 <yellowhat> yes there is some public code, but not that part that you hope for. we started adding basic multisig support to bitcoinj
476 2012-07-17 12:10:27 <yellowhat> code.google.com/r/andreaspeterssonat-hackathon
477 2012-07-17 12:10:35 <yellowhat> thats the clone
478 2012-07-17 12:10:53 <BlueMatt> ah ok
479 2012-07-17 12:11:02 <yellowhat> as a start, the bitcoinj needs all the keys already in the wallet.
480 2012-07-17 12:11:46 <yellowhat> how it will process partially signed TX is not fully clear but we should definately agree to some kind of out-of-band protocol. there is a design document by TD
481 2012-07-17 12:12:12 <BlueMatt> theres also one by gavin, linked up a few lines
482 2012-07-17 12:12:13 <yellowhat> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qvkHrSkVMvVEovUAPhwwhDxBd4LdPMYnbWZHdRBNR08/edit
483 2012-07-17 12:15:26 <BlueMatt> D34TH: wanna help seed the tar.xz for justmoon?
484 2012-07-17 12:15:34 <D34TH> sure bauce
485 2012-07-17 12:15:49 <D34TH> sec its loading
486 2012-07-17 12:15:50 <justmoon> <3
487 2012-07-17 12:16:05 <SomeoneWeird> lol
488 2012-07-17 12:17:13 <D34TH> justmoon, 84.72xxxxx?
489 2012-07-17 12:17:18 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: what are we seeding? :)
490 2012-07-17 12:17:37 <jgarzik> a blockchain?
491 2012-07-17 12:17:43 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: a tar which contains all the bitcoin deps xcompiled for windows
492 2012-07-17 12:17:46 <D34TH> nah, build tools
493 2012-07-17 12:17:47 <BlueMatt> nothing particularly exciting
494 2012-07-17 12:17:54 <justmoon> D34TH: that sounds like me :)
495 2012-07-17 12:18:02 <D34TH> LOL seeding @ 512 KB/s
496 2012-07-17 12:18:47 <D34TH> justmoon: going fast now?
497 2012-07-17 12:18:52 <MagicalTux> btw can anyone here write a minimal ecdsa implementation (just what's needed for bitcoin) using gnu gmp ?
498 2012-07-17 12:18:58 <justmoon> D34TH: yep, thx
499 2012-07-17 12:20:30 <justmoon> MagicalTux: what worthy cause would one be supporting with such an endeavor?
500 2012-07-17 12:20:56 <justmoon> (and yes, I consider getting paid a worthy cause :P)
501 2012-07-17 12:21:27 <MagicalTux> justmoon: removing need of a extra lib to do bitcoin with my bitcoin php module, which would allow me to release the bitcoin client used by mtgox.com (or at least in some parts)
502 2012-07-17 12:22:13 <t7> I just rang up one of the supplier for some shitty software we use at work. Said i dont have the password because the user is on holiday, and after a few mins i managed to get the root password without giving anything more than the company name and my position as "IT manager" ...
503 2012-07-17 12:22:31 <t7> security is for losers
504 2012-07-17 12:22:32 <SomeoneWeird> haha damn t7
505 2012-07-17 12:22:50 <D34TH> magicaltux: if you openssl supports it you can make it inside php because php uses the openssl extension
506 2012-07-17 12:23:07 <MagicalTux> D34TH: PHP doesn't expose openssl ecdsa
507 2012-07-17 12:23:10 <MagicalTux> (yet)
508 2012-07-17 12:23:12 <t7> and this has LOADS of personal information that we would get fined hundreds of thousands for a breach, data protection act and all that
509 2012-07-17 12:23:54 <D34TH> magicaltux: openssl_get_md_methods()
510 2012-07-17 12:25:33 <MagicalTux> hm
511 2012-07-17 12:25:34 <MagicalTux> ecdsa-with-SHA1 ?
512 2012-07-17 12:25:37 <justmoon> D34TH: ecdsa-with-SHA1 is useless, we'd need ecdsa-secp256k1-with-double-SHA256 ^^
513 2012-07-17 12:26:36 <justmoon> but there is a point to be made that it may be easier to expose openssl's ecdsa functionality with some patches to php rather than write your own from scratch, no?
514 2012-07-17 12:26:37 <MagicalTux> I wrote a lazy php ext that uses (and actually includes) cryptopp to provide the required methods to build bitcoin transactions and verify them
515 2012-07-17 12:26:56 <MagicalTux> justmoon: just less portable, while gmp is already quite common
516 2012-07-17 12:27:35 <justmoon> it'd be just as portable as php, no?
517 2012-07-17 12:27:55 <D34TH> MagicalTux: SimpleECDSA?
518 2012-07-17 12:29:52 <MagicalTux> justmoon: I mean, it'll take time until distros & hosting providers update to the new patched version
519 2012-07-17 12:29:54 <vigilyn> what on earth does this mean? [2012-07-17 10:26:11] InvalidChainFound: invalid block=00000000000001d38cbe  height=189498  work=391089284232242410659  date=07/17/12 14:25:03
520 2012-07-17 12:30:46 <justmoon> MagicalTux: yeah I see your point
521 2012-07-17 12:30:49 <MagicalTux> D34TH: seems good enough seen from here, I'll see if it supports the secp256k1 curve correctly and port it in php if it does
522 2012-07-17 12:31:06 <MagicalTux> (actually checked comments, it seems OK)
523 2012-07-17 12:31:35 <D34TH> :D
524 2012-07-17 12:31:55 <MagicalTux> libtomcrypt's ecdsa implementation does not support secp256k1 for some reason
525 2012-07-17 12:32:17 <MagicalTux> (I initially intended to base myself on that one, since I'm a maintainer too)
526 2012-07-17 12:32:30 <jgarzik> MagicalTux: several ecdsa implementations do not.  It's common to link with an ecdsa lib, and then import a custom curve, these days.
527 2012-07-17 12:32:44 <jgarzik> it's easier just to carry the curve data, than an entire ecdsa impl
528 2012-07-17 12:32:58 <D34TH> it has secp256k1
529 2012-07-17 12:33:07 <D34TH> just compiled
530 2012-07-17 12:33:10 <D34TH> and tested
531 2012-07-17 12:33:27 <MagicalTux> jgarzik: what I mean is that some libs do not support modifying the "a" point
532 2012-07-17 12:33:27 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, so apparently every other function is getting passed, except getBlockchain >.<
533 2012-07-17 12:33:47 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: lulwut?
534 2012-07-17 12:34:27 <SomeoneWeird> well adding a console.log(this.node) to transactionstore.js just before getblockchain is called, it seems that most(?) other functions are there, but not getblockchain
535 2012-07-17 12:34:31 <SomeoneWeird> im like wtf too lol
536 2012-07-17 12:36:52 <D34TH> magicaltux: http://pastebin.com/siXhEXA9
537 2012-07-17 12:37:15 <MagicalTux> D34TH: saw that in the comments already
538 2012-07-17 12:37:22 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: it may actually be a different bug than what I had then
539 2012-07-17 12:37:37 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, ok so i explicitly passed the blockchain to transactionstore and that worked, but now im getting another error
540 2012-07-17 12:37:41 <SomeoneWeird> what node version you using?
541 2012-07-17 12:38:10 <justmoon> 0.8.2, I've reproduced the error after you sent me the paste, just haven't had time to look at it yet
542 2012-07-17 12:38:26 <gavinandresen> vigilyn: it means somebody found an invalid block.  See blockchain.info, which is reporting a fork at 189498 right now
543 2012-07-17 12:38:39 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, aight, allgood ill keep looking
544 2012-07-17 12:38:55 <D34TH> justmoon: have you finished downloading?
545 2012-07-17 12:39:10 <justmoon> D34TH: yup
546 2012-07-17 12:39:13 <D34TH> :D
547 2012-07-17 12:39:25 <D34TH> bluematt: there ya go :D
548 2012-07-17 12:39:30 <justmoon> BlueMatt, D34TH: thanks again :)
549 2012-07-17 12:39:38 <D34TH> np
550 2012-07-17 12:42:34 <jgarzik> man, I hate WebSocket.  But everybody's deploying it :/
551 2012-07-17 12:42:47 <justmoon> jgarzik: dito
552 2012-07-17 12:43:03 <SomeoneWeird> socketio ftw lol
553 2012-07-17 12:43:24 <copumpkin> damn json everywhere
554 2012-07-17 12:43:34 <upb> oh so if you pile more crap on top of crap, its gold ?:P
555 2012-07-17 12:44:22 <SomeoneWeird> upb, if it works :P
556 2012-07-17 12:44:41 <justmoon> I'd describe socket.io as gold on top of crap ^^
557 2012-07-17 12:45:23 <BlueMatt> justmoon: np, D34TH thanks
558 2012-07-17 12:46:16 <BlueMatt> anyone know the issue in the current block fork?
559 2012-07-17 12:49:12 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: did the block chain just fork?
560 2012-07-17 12:49:28 <BlueMatt> apparently
561 2012-07-17 12:49:41 <BlueMatt> control-f up for "vigilyn"
562 2012-07-17 12:50:01 <SomeoneWeird> justmoon, ok so (im probably wrong) but because its prototyping the functions its trying to call after the main object has been created they dont exist yet so thats why its failing? mightve changed in newer versions of node
563 2012-07-17 12:52:25 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: not sure I understand - I'd say try and patch it and if it fixes it you were right :)
564 2012-07-17 12:52:49 <SomeoneWeird> lol, im probably wrong
565 2012-07-17 12:53:44 <SomeoneWeird> actually, where does .bind() come from on line 113 of node.js
566 2012-07-17 12:54:33 <justmoon> bind is core javascript: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Function/bind
567 2012-07-17 12:55:19 <justmoon> basically it just let's you define a scope that that function will always have every time you call it
568 2012-07-17 12:56:49 <SomeoneWeird> ok well i "fixed" the other bug, but apparently this.handleStateChange is undefined when it hits that line
569 2012-07-17 13:03:28 <BlueMatt> epscy: in other news, the hsbc aml hearing is going on right now, which is of interest to the earlier discussion
570 2012-07-17 13:03:49 <BlueMatt> http://www.cnbc.com/id/36000856
571 2012-07-17 13:05:49 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: ok, so I found the problem :)
572 2012-07-17 13:05:54 <yellowhat> is this the 2 billion cash thingie BlueMatt ?
573 2012-07-17 13:06:03 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: var n = new b.Node()
574 2012-07-17 13:06:08 <justmoon> you were missing the "new"
575 2012-07-17 13:06:25 <BlueMatt> yellowhat: its the hsbc failed to follow aml laws in mexico and elsewhere and ended up laundering mexican drug money, not sure about the amount
576 2012-07-17 13:06:25 <justmoon> so it was running the constructor outside of the class context
577 2012-07-17 13:06:38 <justmoon> see the examples/ for reference
578 2012-07-17 13:07:15 <SomeoneWeird> oh FUCK.
579 2012-07-17 13:07:25 <justmoon> :D
580 2012-07-17 13:07:50 <SomeoneWeird> i feel like the biggest idiot lol
581 2012-07-17 13:07:58 <justmoon> sorry for the derpiness on my part I should have seen it too :P
582 2012-07-17 13:08:00 <SomeoneWeird> haha thanks man
583 2012-07-17 13:08:15 <justmoon> nw
584 2012-07-17 13:08:42 <SomeoneWeird> also the git repo in package.json should be updated
585 2012-07-17 13:10:34 <sturles> Hmm.  Most of the stolen funds from the last Bitcoinica theft ends up at this address after a lot of washing: 1SKLADuZdfR722o2CBFDps5Dj77XxPuVe
586 2012-07-17 13:14:17 <sturles> Makes me wonder what the whole point of the washing was.
587 2012-07-17 13:14:33 <BlueMatt> it was clearly done poorly...
588 2012-07-17 13:14:39 <copumpkin> someone might assume that all laundry is created equal
589 2012-07-17 13:14:42 <justmoon> SomeoneWeird: you're right, will fix it
590 2012-07-17 13:15:20 <BlueMatt> copumpkin: apparently, some of the best laundering would be to use hsbc mexico...
591 2012-07-17 13:15:34 <copumpkin> my local coin laundry does a pretty good job
592 2012-07-17 13:15:47 <BlueMatt> heh
593 2012-07-17 13:15:50 <copumpkin> whiter than white :)
594 2012-07-17 13:20:23 <bitllc> ;;ticker
595 2012-07-17 13:20:24 <gribble> Best bid: 8.4, Best ask: 8.40001, Bid-ask spread: 9.99999999962e-06, Last trade: 8.4, 24 hour volume: 253196, 24 hour low: 7.3215, 24 hour high: 9.49
596 2012-07-17 13:34:07 <epscy> who says the washing is finished yet?
597 2012-07-17 13:34:29 <epscy> the best thing to do with those funds is just to leave them there for ages
598 2012-07-17 13:34:43 <epscy> then cash them out on multiple exchanges
599 2012-07-17 13:49:20 <jgarzik> epscy: I would be willing to bet that /some/ exchanges keep an eye out for questionable bitcoins
600 2012-07-17 13:49:53 <nsh> questionable in what sense?
601 2012-07-17 13:50:18 <epscy> could satoshidice be used to wash coins?
602 2012-07-17 13:50:56 <BlueMatt> most sites could be
603 2012-07-17 13:51:16 <BlueMatt> satoshidice, no
604 2012-07-17 13:51:26 <epscy> why not?
605 2012-07-17 13:51:50 <epscy> oh they send the money back to the same address
606 2012-07-17 13:52:11 <BlueMatt> it pays out to the address used to send money to it, each payout has the input attached, each bet is listed on their site, including the in tx and payout
607 2012-07-17 13:54:15 <t7> what happened with the bitcoin pirate fiasco?
608 2012-07-17 14:02:49 <jgarzik> SatoshiDICE max bet raised to 250 BTC.  This should be interesting.
609 2012-07-17 14:03:49 <epscy> heh, awesome
610 2012-07-17 14:06:20 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: good, means people run out of coins quicker and cant keep flooding my chain
611 2012-07-17 14:06:29 <jgarzik> hehe
612 2012-07-17 14:06:40 <BlueMatt> s/my chain/the chain on my drive/
613 2012-07-17 14:07:03 <luke-jr> jgarzik: want to write a patch to bet 250 BTC when we find a block (including a double-spend of it in the block) and only transmit the block iff we lose the bet? ;)
614 2012-07-17 14:08:04 <jgarzik> morally, no, of course.  but it begins to make economic rational sense for a miner at those prices.
615 2012-07-17 14:09:46 <jgarzik> speaking of chain spam...
616 2012-07-17 14:10:15 <vigilyn> there's btcdice.com now too
617 2012-07-17 14:10:35 <jgarzik> Has anyone done any work on running a sister chain, whose purpose would be publishing generic, small bits of data?
618 2012-07-17 14:11:17 <jgarzik> if bitcoin could be leveraged to create a second, super-strong (difficulty-wise) chain for publishing crypto-signed messages, there might be less demand to do so in the main bitcoin chain.  (and I see a lot of value in a data chain)
619 2012-07-17 14:11:24 <jgarzik> TD: ^
620 2012-07-17 14:11:28 <Optimo> namecoin-ish?
621 2012-07-17 14:11:36 <vigilyn> gamblers' chain
622 2012-07-17 14:12:04 <Optimo> satoshi dice bothering in this way
623 2012-07-17 14:12:45 <jgarzik> a sister chain is better than all these <data>OP_DROP proposals IMO
624 2012-07-17 14:13:32 <BlueMatt> has anyone actually been using much <data> OP_DROP?
625 2012-07-17 14:15:11 <jgarzik> not yet, hence "proposals"  TD's bond stuff included something like OP_DROP IIUC
626 2012-07-17 14:15:15 <luke-jr> I spent some p2pool data outputs.
627 2012-07-17 14:15:48 <sturles> jgarzik: Any progress for your filter patch?
628 2012-07-17 14:16:04 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: wait, they're spendable?
629 2012-07-17 14:16:05 <jgarzik> sturles: not lately.  no blockers other than time
630 2012-07-17 14:16:15 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: yes :p
631 2012-07-17 14:16:33 <BlueMatt> oh, well that is ok then...someone wanna go through and write a script to find + spend them all?
632 2012-07-17 14:16:36 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: since then, I modified my autospender to ignore zero-value outputs
633 2012-07-17 14:16:38 <jgarzik> sturles: there is a consensus on the design, but it has not yet been coded
634 2012-07-17 14:17:02 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: why? it would be better if your autospender did spend 0-value outputs
635 2012-07-17 14:17:08 <jgarzik> sturles: need to pick a bloom filter algorithm, and standardize on a single universal serialization of it (a la CTransaction and CBlock)
636 2012-07-17 14:17:18 <jgarzik> sturles: the rest is 10 minutes work
637 2012-07-17 14:17:25 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: no, it'd clutter my wallet :<
638 2012-07-17 14:17:26 <gribble> New news from bitcoinrss: gavinandresen opened pull request 1606 on bitcoin/bitcoin <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/1606>
639 2012-07-17 14:17:31 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: ^^ if you want a project :)
640 2012-07-17 14:17:51 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: ok, so make it spend to an address thats in a separate wallet?
641 2012-07-17 14:18:05 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: it's not smart enough to combine inputs either
642 2012-07-17 14:18:08 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: the filter* stuff?
643 2012-07-17 14:18:15 <BlueMatt> luke-jr: mmm...
644 2012-07-17 14:18:25 <sturles> jgarzik: OK, thanks.  I hope you get the time soon.
645 2012-07-17 14:19:11 <BlueMatt> jgarzik: yea, Ive been thinking about writing that in sometime, but every time I get close to it, I just assume by the time Ive written it, someone else will already have it working...
646 2012-07-17 14:19:20 <Optimo> nice to see all these smart minds still working hard
647 2012-07-17 14:19:41 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: mainly CBloomFilter
648 2012-07-17 14:19:51 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: the rest is easy glue
649 2012-07-17 14:19:54 <BlueMatt> yep
650 2012-07-17 14:21:05 <gavinandresen> ACKS requested on pull 1606; adds an extra sighash argument to signrawtransaction
651 2012-07-17 14:23:08 <luke-jr> gavinandresen: I would, but I don't understand SIGHASH stuff enough to test it reasonably well
652 2012-07-17 14:25:12 <gavinandresen> luke-jr: well once I pull it, it will be a good tool to play with all the SIGHASH modes...
653 2012-07-17 14:36:44 <jgarzik> gavinandresen: thanks for fixing sendrawtx btw
654 2012-07-17 14:36:55 <jgarzik> one item off the todo list
655 2012-07-17 14:37:47 <BlueMatt> can we do win32 auto-update for 0.7 (#1453)?
656 2012-07-17 14:41:05 <jgarzik> BlueMatt: sounds good to me, though I am not qualified to ACK it
657 2012-07-17 14:42:50 <luke-jr> BIP22 has been settled down for nearly a month now (bitcoind implementation in #936)
658 2012-07-17 14:45:37 <Marf> hello how long until i can sign transactions with my smartphone and the client for maximum savety?
659 2012-07-17 14:46:20 <lianj> Marf: until you write it :P
660 2012-07-17 14:46:22 <BlueMatt> its coming, but timeframes for a bunch of volunteers is always hard...
661 2012-07-17 14:46:42 <LuaKT> Okay, question. I generated a wallet on my server and sent funds to i when the blockchain wasn't fully downloaded. I then copied that wallet and loaded it up in my local Bitcoin-QT with the chain updated. the funds aren't showing in my client
662 2012-07-17 14:46:44 <LuaKT> Any idea why?
663 2012-07-17 14:46:48 <Marf> is it part of v1.0?
664 2012-07-17 14:46:48 <Optimo> who does run bitcoinwatch?
665 2012-07-17 14:46:55 <Marf> tcatm
666 2012-07-17 14:47:14 <BlueMatt> Marf: yes
667 2012-07-17 14:48:26 <luke-jr> Marf: I suggest if it is important to you, that you hire sipa full time to work on it ;)
668 2012-07-17 14:48:39 <BlueMatt> too late, hes got a job...
669 2012-07-17 14:49:18 <luke-jr> BlueMatt: one he wouldn't be willing to quit if the opportunity to work full time on Bitcoin arose? :p
670 2012-07-17 14:49:33 <BlueMatt> no clue, but I kinda doubt it...
671 2012-07-17 14:49:52 <BlueMatt> working on bitcoin wouldnt exactly be a stable job...
672 2012-07-17 14:50:06 <luke-jr> depends on the person/company financing it
673 2012-07-17 14:50:28 <BlueMatt> ok, I doubt anyone who would be able to provide stable jobs would hire someone to work on bitcoin full-time
674 2012-07-17 14:51:27 <makomk> I see the bad P2SH transaction of doom lives on...
675 2012-07-17 14:51:43 <BlueMatt> is that what triggered the reorg earlier?
676 2012-07-17 14:52:26 <BlueMatt> so/reorg/fork/
677 2012-07-17 14:52:26 <lianj> makomk: hash?
678 2012-07-17 14:52:32 <makomk> It's why there was a short fork at block 189498. More recent invalids are unrelated.
679 2012-07-17 14:53:07 <makomk> http://blockchain.info/tx-index/3618498/4005d6bea3a93fb72f006d23e2685b85069d270cb57d15f0c057ef2d5e3f78d2
680 2012-07-17 14:53:51 <makomk> More recent orphans, evne.
681 2012-07-17 14:58:49 <BlueMatt> gavinandresen: what are some of the fun test-cases in the first n testnet3 blocks?
682 2012-07-17 14:59:29 <gavinandresen> There's an invalid BIP16 transaction before the BIP16 switchover time
683 2012-07-17 15:00:24 <gavinandresen> And most (all?) of the test cases from src/test/data/script_valid.json are in the chain as funded then spent transactions
684 2012-07-17 15:01:28 <gavinandresen> (so there is a maximum-size, and maximum-sigops, and maximum-pushdata transaction, transactions with maximum OP_ADD operand size, etc)
685 2012-07-17 15:02:05 <BlueMatt> mmm, ok fun, thanks, Ill add some similar ones to my testing chain
686 2012-07-17 15:14:42 <osxorgate> noobsauce alert.. i'm trying to locate bitcoind on osx.. where is it?
687 2012-07-17 15:15:04 <BlueMatt> its not
688 2012-07-17 15:15:31 <osxorgate> any way i can access that handy rpc ?
689 2012-07-17 15:16:29 <osxorgate> i'm trying to run my python code that uses the blockchain on osx
690 2012-07-17 15:19:15 <BlueMatt> start bitcoin-qt with -server -rpcuser=... -rpcpassword=...
691 2012-07-17 15:27:29 <LuaKT> I just sent a transaction of 0.0001
692 2012-07-17 15:27:36 <LuaKT> And got charged 0.005
693 2012-07-17 15:27:42 <LuaKT> as the fee
694 2012-07-17 15:27:55 <LuaKT> I thought the fee was 0.0005?
695 2012-07-17 15:28:06 <LuaKT> Am I missing something?
696 2012-07-17 15:30:13 <gmaxwell> LuaKT: the base fee is 0.0005 per KB of data you send.
697 2012-07-17 15:30:40 <gmaxwell> (if the txn doesn't otherwise qualify as free, which having an output of less than 0.01 makes sure it won't)
698 2012-07-17 15:31:03 <LuaKT> Okay, how do I know the size of my transaction?
699 2012-07-17 15:31:06 <gmaxwell> Otherwise an attaker could intentionally craft 100KB transactions and only pay 0.0005 each.
700 2012-07-17 15:31:40 <LuaKT> https://blockchain.info/tx-index/12519796/1e918f9e609e3542e56b528a8bf66534bdd0712d294e20a1277dc3f27abbc593
701 2012-07-17 15:31:43 <LuaKT> 258 Bytes
702 2012-07-17 15:31:48 <gmaxwell> Normal txn are around 250 bytes or so, they become large if they have many inputs or outputs. The GUI doesn't show it anywhere, IIRC.
703 2012-07-17 15:32:09 <LuaKT> Yet the blockchain wallet I was checking out says -0.0051 BTC
704 2012-07-17 15:32:16 <gmaxwell> Sounds like you have the builtin fee set then.
705 2012-07-17 15:32:36 <gmaxwell> oh this is a blockchain.info transaction?
706 2012-07-17 15:32:39 <gmaxwell> who knows then.
707 2012-07-17 15:32:53 <LuaKT> The blockchain.info API page says "All transactions include a 0.0005 BTC miners fee"
708 2012-07-17 15:34:00 <gmaxwell> I can see no reason for a fee larger than 0.0005 there.
709 2012-07-17 15:34:10 <LuaKT> Strange
710 2012-07-17 15:34:31 <gmaxwell> It would only be like the umpteenth blockchain.info fee bug I've seen.
711 2012-07-17 15:49:19 <Joric_> gmaxwell, which bug?
712 2012-07-17 15:50:24 <gmaxwell> Joric: in this case paying a 0.005 fee when 0.0005 would have been sensible.
713 2012-07-17 16:56:21 <helo> anyone know how the transactions are sent with the "Offline transactions for BitcoinJ/Android bitcoin wallet: Andreas Schildbach and grazcoin
714 2012-07-17 16:56:27 <helo> - Ability for Android Wallet to do offline transactions" from the hackathon?
715 2012-07-17 17:01:03 <BlueMatt> theres a thread on the bitcoinj mailing list, Id guess read that?