1 2012-09-15 02:31:15 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: ping
 2 2012-09-15 02:32:04 <gmaxwell> pong
 3 2012-09-15 02:38:25 <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I'm pondering how to implement coinbasevalue for BFGMiner, but the problem I hit is how to deal with users mining on the same address from multiple machines
 4 2012-09-15 02:38:31 <Luke-Jr> how to make the work unique on them, that is
 5 2012-09-15 02:38:52 <Luke-Jr> I presume Windows has some kind of GUID generator, but not sure if Linux has anything similar or if there might be a portable solution
 6 2012-09-15 02:39:19 <gmaxwell> there is.. but I dont know that that sounds like a great idea.
 7 2012-09-15 02:39:37 <gmaxwell> how much randomness do you need?
 8 2012-09-15 02:39:55 <Luke-Jr> doesn't have to be random, just unique across computers ignorant of each other
 9 2012-09-15 02:40:04 <Luke-Jr> if getting the MAC address wasn't a pain, I'd just SHA256 that :p
10 2012-09-15 02:40:22 <gmaxwell> just e.g. read /dev/urandom or the equal on windows.
11 2012-09-15 02:40:23 <Luke-Jr> although I suppose some miners might run multiple instances on the same PC
12 2012-09-15 02:40:33 <Luke-Jr> hm
13 2012-09-15 02:40:40 <gmaxwell> and use enough that its unlikely to collide.
14 2012-09-15 02:47:32 <Luke-Jr> not finding a trivial way to get entropy on Windows, sigh :<
15 2012-09-15 02:48:48 <gmaxwell> go look to see what tor does.
16 2012-09-15 02:50:48 <Luke-Jr> Tor probably links to Windows crypto libs
17 2012-09-15 03:12:45 <Luke-Jr> ugh crap
18 2012-09-15 03:13:00 <Luke-Jr> I'd be forced to implement a base58 parser to do this :/
19 2012-09-15 03:13:44 <Luke-Jr> not sure it's worth it
20 2012-09-15 04:35:51 <eco_> ?
21 2012-09-15 04:37:01 <Luke-Jr> ?
22 2012-09-15 05:40:56 <stamit> i'd like to state that gmaxwell is now officially BANNED from the WORLD
23 2012-09-15 05:41:13 <stamit> it's a final decision, i am afraid
24 2012-09-15 05:41:18 <stamit> cannot be appealed
25 2012-09-15 05:41:42 <stamit> unless you are thinking about talking to someone like "god" or whatever higher authority, like htat
26 2012-09-15 05:42:02 <stamit> you should pray, gmaxwell
27 2012-09-15 05:42:35 <stamit> next time, next life, think better about what you type
28 2012-09-15 05:43:26 <stamit> you are no longer to be considered human
29 2012-09-15 05:43:34 <stamit> you are now a non-human creature, such as "troll"
30 2012-09-15 05:43:40 <stamit> you get this?
31 2012-09-15 05:44:10 <stamit> that's how you are to stay
32 2012-09-15 05:59:59 <Luke-Jr> 
ACTION wonders why stamit isn't banned yet

33 2012-09-15 06:00:16 <stamit> it's because he talks in this official manner
34 2012-09-15 06:01:42 <stamit> i could perhaps bring a pal to play along and make the decision really really official
35 2012-09-15 06:03:16 <stamit> yes, gmaxwell, we've discussed your case AT LENGTH
36 2012-09-15 06:03:34 <Luke-Jr> 
ACTION /ignore stamit

37 2012-09-15 06:04:33 <stamit> we've determined that your symptoms are due to a bigger problem
38 2012-09-15 06:05:05 <stamit> you need to pay us, in order to be properly evaluated about your mental state
39 2012-09-15 06:06:44 <stamit> (unless you are covered by our insurance)
40 2012-09-15 06:37:55 <stamit> 
ACTION really wonders who is this Juke-Jr character, and why he isn't banned yet

41 2012-09-15 06:38:13 <stamit> you totally have to /ignore Luke-Jr
42 2012-09-15 06:44:17 <Detritus> Luke-Jr people know. stamit people don't.
43 2012-09-15 07:39:28 <daedeloth> I'm setting up a cron job that processes all transactiosn since last cronjob
44 2012-09-15 07:39:40 <daedeloth> I noticed there is a start & limit parameter for gettransactions
45 2012-09-15 07:39:55 <daedeloth> but the transactions don't seem to have an id
46 2012-09-15 07:40:41 <daedeloth> is there a way to not "count them manually in the database"?
47 2012-09-15 07:42:19 <daedeloth> hm it works the other way around
48 2012-09-15 07:42:20 <daedeloth> never mind
49 2012-09-15 08:34:14 <sipa> how large is blkindex.dat these days?
50 2012-09-15 08:35:28 <Joric> 900 megs
51 2012-09-15 08:35:50 <Joric> 966 rather
52 2012-09-15 08:37:38 <daedeloth> what happens when the bitcoins of a false transaction gets send to a new account?
53 2012-09-15 08:38:02 <daedeloth> ie: "forwarding fake coins"
54 2012-09-15 08:39:21 <Luke-Jr> there are no fake coins
55 2012-09-15 08:39:42 <daedeloth> yea but there are fake transactions, right?
56 2012-09-15 08:41:13 <sipa> there are invalid transactions
57 2012-09-15 08:41:22 <sipa> and there potentially reversed transactions
58 2012-09-15 08:41:35 <sipa> (after a reorganization)
59 2012-09-15 08:42:00 <daedeloth> well, invalid transactions. What if I take an invalid transaction and I create a new invalid transaction based on this invalid transaction
60 2012-09-15 08:42:23 <daedeloth> does that influence my bitcoin client? Or are the invalid transactions just ignroed by the miners?
61 2012-09-15 08:42:42 <sipa> yes, miners are required to fully validate transactions
62 2012-09-15 08:42:56 <daedeloth> so they are just ignroed and there are no consequences for my client?
63 2012-09-15 08:45:11 <Luke-Jr> daedeloth: all fully validating clients ignore invalid transactions
64 2012-09-15 08:45:21 <daedeloth> ok, great, thanks :)
65 2012-09-15 08:45:37 <daedeloth> was just wondering if my client would get "punished" for sending out invalid transactions
66 2012-09-15 08:45:46 <Luke-Jr> it would
67 2012-09-15 08:45:59 <daedeloth> hm, how so?
68 2012-09-15 08:46:12 <Luke-Jr> fully validating clients like to ban clients that give them invalid transactions
69 2012-09-15 08:46:25 <daedeloth> aha, ok
70 2012-09-15 08:46:54 <daedeloth> I will keep that in mind :)