1 2012-09-16 01:22:09 <denisx> is it normal that testnet3 does not accept any block?
2 2012-09-16 01:22:48 <Luke-Jr> denisx: using an obsolete miner?
3 2012-09-16 01:23:00 <denisx> Luke-Jr: bitcoin-ultraprune
4 2012-09-16 01:23:15 <denisx> hmm, aehm, no, ztex miner
5 2012-09-16 01:23:29 <denisx> and cgminer
6 2012-09-16 01:23:52 <Luke-Jr> dunno anything about ultraprune
7 2012-09-16 01:26:43 <gmaxwell> denisx: it accepts blocks fine, I'm mining on it.
8 2012-09-16 01:27:09 <gmaxwell> denisx: are you either not synced up, or not connected, or not using the righ port/rpcuser/password?
9 2012-09-16 01:30:00 <benjamindees> figured out my issue with nLockTime... I neglected to set the sequence number. Seems to work now.
10 2012-09-16 01:35:56 <benjamindees> http://blockchain.info/tx-index/24112789/b0fa60f601d5fe6fb1501aa614503b9af688492f68bcf8268d7cdb30f3534079
11 2012-09-16 01:36:16 <benjamindees> ^^ locked until block 199000
12 2012-09-16 01:42:07 <gmaxwell> "locktime" : 199000,
13 2012-09-16 01:42:18 <gmaxwell> "sequence" : 4278190335
14 2012-09-16 01:42:21 <gmaxwell> yup.
15 2012-09-16 01:44:54 <benjamindees> and apparently I'm using the terminology backwards but, meh...
16 2012-09-16 01:48:01 <gmaxwell> yea, right. kinda goofy, sipa suggested the expectation was that it would only be used with transaction replacement.
17 2012-09-16 05:02:03 <bitcoin_> when is the next bitcoin version going to be released?
18 2012-09-16 05:10:54 <Luke-Jr> bitcoin_: probably when the conference is over
19 2012-09-16 05:11:19 <bitcoin_> oh ok Luke-Jr, i guess thats taking up alot of peoples time...
20 2012-09-16 05:11:34 <Luke-Jr> bitcoin_: 0.7rc3 is available tho
21 2012-09-16 05:12:38 <bitcoin_> oh, can i see what new features are going to be in that version Luke-Jr ?
22 2012-09-16 05:12:48 <Luke-Jr> you can download that rc3
23 2012-09-16 05:13:20 <bitcoin_> oh im mostly interested in a bug/feature list :)
24 2012-09-16 05:15:49 <Luke-Jr> yes, everyone is???
25 2012-09-16 05:59:40 <OneEyed> % bitcoind getrawtransaction eb58b44a4aa6c8e34f53acc86fe3e7143602e88962e4f8db3dfb4f7a905c0532 | wc -c
26 2012-09-16 05:59:42 <OneEyed> 176573
27 2012-09-16 05:59:46 <OneEyed> Wow!
28 2012-09-16 06:00:42 <OneEyed> Too long to give to decoderawtransaction on the command line??? Made my script crash, too bad.
29 2012-09-16 06:00:51 <OneEyed> Switching to JSON RPC then
30 2012-09-16 08:30:51 <Ukto> hey guys, i had to shutdown one of my bitcoind servers, and bring it back up... now its stuck giving: ConnectInputs() mapTransactions prev not found, AcceptToMemoryPool() : ConnectInputs failed, storing orphan tx over and over
31 2012-09-16 08:31:24 <Ukto> and now it finally started moving up block numbers.. very slowly
32 2012-09-16 08:42:52 <Evilmax> bitcoin-24 has closed?
33 2012-09-16 09:26:25 <JuliaMartin1ka1> hello. is possible to get block number from listtransactions?
34 2012-09-16 09:26:38 <JuliaMartin1ka1> on testnet?
35 2012-09-16 09:53:26 <gmaxwell> JuliaMartin1ka1: the confirmation count gives you that, with a little subtraction
36 2012-09-16 10:57:40 <JuliaMartin1ka1> question: last Y share from upstream_result is the last share of the block?
37 2012-09-16 10:58:02 <JuliaMartin1ka1> how can I find the last share of the block?
38 2012-09-16 10:59:37 <gmaxwell> 'last share'? I'm not sure what you're asking about.
39 2012-09-16 11:15:22 <JuliaMartin1ka1> is blockexporer (http://blockexplorer.com/testnet) on testnet updated? because in testnet last block number is 82628 and in blockexplorer is 26224
40 2012-09-16 11:16:27 <gmaxwell> JuliaMartin1ka1: Bitcoin 0.7 resets testnet, and blockexplorer is on the new testnet.
41 2012-09-16 11:17:13 <gmaxwell> JuliaMartin1ka1: what were you asking about 'the last share of the block'? I didn't follow your question.
42 2012-09-16 11:19:35 <gmaxwell> "last block number is 82628" in indicates that you're talking about the old one.
43 2012-09-16 11:19:47 <Greee> gmaxwell: we use 60300 version , how we join the new testnet that blockexplore use?
44 2012-09-16 11:21:52 <gmaxwell> Greee: you run bitcoin 0.7, from git or http://sourceforge.net/projects/bitcoin/files/Bitcoin/bitcoin-0.7.0/test/
45 2012-09-16 11:28:07 <Greee> ok thanks its updating "version" : 70003,
46 2012-09-16 11:50:43 <JuliaMartin1ka1> question: we can use version 70003 in normal mode as server?
47 2012-09-16 11:51:45 <gmaxwell> As a server for what?
48 2012-09-16 11:52:33 <Greee> bitcoin network as pool server for mining.
49 2012-09-16 11:53:28 <gmaxwell> The reference client isn't a poolserver by itself, you use it with poolserver software. And yes, you can use it for that.
50 2012-09-16 11:53:35 <Greee> we build our front end script and 70003 is little new and modified with new details
51 2012-09-16 11:54:32 <gmaxwell> It would be wise to upgrade now or be ready to. It will become required to mine on the network eventually.
52 2012-09-16 11:55:38 <MobiusL> WHO voted for and approved this change?
53 2012-09-16 11:55:57 <gmaxwell> What change?
54 2012-09-16 11:56:25 <MobiusL> the next version of the bitcoin
55 2012-09-16 11:57:03 <gmaxwell> I suspect there is some confusion going on here.
56 2012-09-16 11:57:34 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: The core development team releases updates to the software every couple months.
57 2012-09-16 11:58:23 <MobiusL> The question is WHO voted and approved it?
58 2012-09-16 11:58:38 <gmaxwell> It's a new version of the implementation, not of bitcoin itself. Bitcoin software from years ago continues to work.
59 2012-09-16 11:59:09 <gmaxwell> There is no voting.
60 2012-09-16 11:59:17 <MobiusL> Then the question is WHO voted and approved it the new implementation?
61 2012-09-16 11:59:43 <MobiusL> Then the question is WHO approved the new implementation?
62 2012-09-16 12:00:14 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: What exactly is YOUR concern here? :P
63 2012-09-16 12:00:16 <MobiusL> Who specifically?
64 2012-09-16 12:00:34 <gmaxwell> Who did what, specifically?
65 2012-09-16 12:01:10 <MobiusL> This is not a hard question. please answer the question: <MobiusL> Then the question is WHO approved the new implementation?
66 2012-09-16 12:01:46 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: You sound like you are being rather agressive, but I can't figure out about what. Precisely what are you asking?
67 2012-09-16 12:01:52 <gmaxwell> And what is your actual concern?
68 2012-09-16 12:03:14 <MobiusL> Since I mine and use the bitcoin network, I and all of it's users should know who is is making these decisions, Would you not agree?
69 2012-09-16 12:03:43 <gmaxwell> making _what_ decisions? This is what I'm not following. I don't understand what the substance of your concern is.
70 2012-09-16 12:04:20 <MobiusL> The question is WHO approved the new implementation?
71 2012-09-16 12:04:42 <MC-Eeepc> its a bot
72 2012-09-16 12:04:50 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: hah
73 2012-09-16 12:05:23 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: I'm not going to keep trying to guess at what you're asking. Go back to the beginning and explain your concern so that I can understand it, so I give you the righ answer.
74 2012-09-16 12:06:41 <MobiusL> I want to know who is making these decisions in the new implementation
75 2012-09-16 12:06:49 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: what decisions?
76 2012-09-16 12:07:22 <gmaxwell> (Different people make different decisions, so my question in response is material)
77 2012-09-16 12:08:05 <MobiusL> Then please enlighten me as to who decides what?
78 2012-09-16 12:08:58 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: I'm not going to write a novel on how the development process works right now simply because we're having a hard time communicating. What initially inspired your initial question?
79 2012-09-16 12:09:23 <MC-Eeepc> dont like new version dont use new version
80 2012-09-16 12:09:31 <MC-Eeepc> there is your vote
81 2012-09-16 12:09:35 <MobiusL> <gmaxwell> It would be wise to upgrade now or be ready to. It will become required to mine on the network eventually.
82 2012-09-16 12:09:58 <otimm> MobiusL: You decide everything by choosing and running the bitcoin implementation
83 2012-09-16 12:10:06 <MobiusL> MC-Eeepc: My questions are for gmaxwell not you
84 2012-09-16 12:10:10 <gmaxwell> Oh. This is in reference to BIP_0034. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0034
85 2012-09-16 12:10:12 <MC-Eeepc> thats just multisig
86 2012-09-16 12:10:14 <riush> lol
87 2012-09-16 12:10:18 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: please true the other people in here with respect.
88 2012-09-16 12:11:07 <MobiusL> such as the comment "<MC-Eeepc> there is your vote"
89 2012-09-16 12:11:22 <gmaxwell> It's a fair statement.
90 2012-09-16 12:11:37 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: There is a flaw in the older implementations of bitcoin where distinctive transactions with the same transaction IDs can be created.
91 2012-09-16 12:13:37 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: This opened up several attacks, the wost of which were fixed by BIP_0030, which added a validation rule that prevents one transaction from overwriting a currently unspent transaction. But it does not prevent duplicates after the first had been spent completely. To do that requires making sure that all transactions are unique, which can only be achieved by adding uniqing data to every block.
92 2012-09-16 12:14:37 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: to achieve that BIP_0034 was proposed, which has miners add the block height to the coinbase field in every mined block and set the block version to 2. The software doesn't _require_ this behavior from other nodes, and everyone already permits it... so its fully compatible.
93 2012-09-16 12:15:39 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: but once a large supermajority of the blocks have version 2 nodes running BIP_0034 compatible code will enforce it.
94 2012-09-16 12:16:53 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: The height in coinbase may have been my suggestion, when we talked about these issues around 8 months ago. Gavin wrote the BIP and the implementation, and it was discussed here, on github, and the development list.
95 2012-09-16 12:17:42 <gmaxwell> You're free to keep using an old version, or some other version to mine??? though eventually you'll need a backport of BIP_0034 for it.
96 2012-09-16 12:18:46 <gmaxwell> (ah, it was also discussed on bitcointalk.org)
97 2012-09-16 12:19:05 <gmaxwell> It's a pretty utterly uncontroversial fix.
98 2012-09-16 12:19:13 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: Have I answered your questions?
99 2012-09-16 12:19:40 <MobiusL> no
100 2012-09-16 12:19:47 <otimm> lol
101 2012-09-16 12:21:59 <gmaxwell> MobiusL: Then you're going to have to help me out.
102 2012-09-16 12:22:37 <MobiusL> I'll get back to you on that
103 2012-09-16 12:23:01 <Arnavion> Off-topic: Is it a freenode custom to highlight someone multiple times even when it's in successive lines?
104 2012-09-16 12:23:07 <Arnavion> <-- Primarily Rizon person
105 2012-09-16 12:23:25 <gmaxwell> Arnavion: 'highlight'?
106 2012-09-16 12:23:45 <Arnavion> Like you kept saying "MobiusL:"
107 2012-09-16 12:23:59 <Arnavion> That is with the intent of pinging him, right?
108 2012-09-16 12:24:06 <gmaxwell> Arnavion: ah, well you never know when someone is going to jump in the middle; esp when writing long lines.
109 2012-09-16 12:24:13 <gmaxwell> Arnavion: no, no intent to 'ping'.
110 2012-09-16 12:24:20 <Arnavion> Ah
111 2012-09-16 12:24:22 <Arnavion> I see
112 2012-09-16 12:24:34 <gmaxwell> If you've got a client that is doing something obnoxious when you're mentioned.. you should get that fixed. :)
113 2012-09-16 12:24:43 <Arnavion> That's actually a feature
114 2012-09-16 12:24:55 <gmaxwell> most clients don't bother you when you have focus already, as far as I know.
115 2012-09-16 12:25:08 <Arnavion> Yes, that's true
116 2012-09-16 12:26:16 <MC-Eeepc> mine does
117 2012-09-16 12:26:20 <MC-Eeepc> BONG
118 2012-09-16 12:26:24 <MC-Eeepc> BONG
119 2012-09-16 12:26:29 <gmaxwell> ACTION patiently awaits the announcement of MobiusL's campaign to lynch all bitcoin developers for ambigious reasons??? "LABDAR".
120 2012-09-16 12:26:52 <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: I feel sorry for you son, I've got 99 problems but a BONG aint one...
121 2012-09-16 12:27:08 <MC-Eeepc> quite
122 2012-09-16 12:34:22 <MC-Eeepc> how is the bitcoin conf going
123 2012-09-16 12:34:34 <MC-Eeepc> shitstorm yet?
124 2012-09-16 12:40:15 <riush> [Ma
125 2012-09-16 12:40:16 <riush> 9[Ma
126 2012-09-16 12:40:40 <riush> err sry
127 2012-09-16 12:41:41 <JuliaMartin1ka1> question: for every transaction (from listransaction) we receive 50btc?
128 2012-09-16 13:48:19 <wumpus> JuliaMartin1ka1: the 50 btc limit only applies to mined transactions, normal transactions can be any amount
129 2012-09-16 14:15:55 <helo> JuliaMartin1ka1: and only one 50btc per block, not per transaction. a block can have thousands of transactions.
130 2012-09-16 14:16:10 <helo> wow delayed response heh
131 2012-09-16 14:52:41 <Luke-Jr> when did we switch from testnet1 to testnet2?
132 2012-09-16 15:28:17 <Greee> gmaxwell: here?
133 2012-09-16 15:28:40 <Greee> what exactly is paytxfee ?
134 2012-09-16 15:29:04 <Greee> how this affect my pool server?
135 2012-09-16 15:30:08 <gmaxwell> 06:50 <Greee> ic and paytxfee on bitcoin.conf its for solo ? they mine directly with bitcoin address? withour webpage registered worker?
136 2012-09-16 15:30:11 <gmaxwell> 06:51 <gmaxwell> That has to do with how much fees _you_ pay when sending coins out of that wallet.
137 2012-09-16 15:30:14 <gmaxwell> 06:52 <Greee> sending coins from wallet has fees? or il set for pool tax...
138 2012-09-16 15:30:16 <gmaxwell> 06:52 <gmaxwell> It has nothing to do with pool fees.
139 2012-09-16 15:30:19 <gmaxwell> 06:53 <Greee> hmmm
140 2012-09-16 15:30:21 <gmaxwell> 06:53 <gmaxwell> It controls how much fees you include with your transactions to encourage other miners to mine them.
141 2012-09-16 15:31:00 <OneEyed> Looks like blockchain's pushtx accepts transactions that will not be relayed by bitcoind
142 2012-09-16 15:31:15 <OneEyed> (which is its right, but that's not very userfriendly)
143 2012-09-16 15:31:21 <OneEyed> such as https://blockchain.info/tx/41f39bf36c1c071697bdfb13ace41d0d7a3455afcb2dc5e4fb5d30961dab44ae
144 2012-09-16 15:31:41 <Greee> yes but now i`m in a bubble if i set auto payout more than 0.1 how much the miner gets? is there a tax fee?
145 2012-09-16 15:35:22 <gmaxwell> Greee: it has nothing to do with pooling or your own mining.
146 2012-09-16 15:35:46 <BlueMatt> <gmaxwell> MC-Eeepc: I feel sorry for you son, I've got 99 problems but a BONG aint one... <gmaxwell> ... drugs are bad, ummkay? :P
147 2012-09-16 15:36:12 <Luke-Jr> ACTION sends gmaxwell a bitcoinbong
148 2012-09-16 15:36:19 <BlueMatt> ACTION -> breakfast
149 2012-09-16 15:51:11 <Greee> gmaxwell pm so past a transaction
150 2012-09-16 15:52:17 <gmaxwell> Greee: yes, if a transaction has any output less than 0.01 BTC it needs to pay a fee in order to be accepted by your peers, unless its in a block.
151 2012-09-16 15:52:31 <gmaxwell> This makes it harder for someone to DOS attack the network with tiny outputs.
152 2012-09-16 15:55:52 <Greee> so why if i transfer more than 0.01 i get same fee 0.0005?
153 2012-09-16 15:57:43 <gmaxwell> Greee: because your transaction didn't qualify as free for some other reason, e.g. rapidly resending recieved coins.
154 2012-09-16 15:58:01 <gmaxwell> or because it spent a lot of tiny inputs and has large data.
155 2012-09-16 16:49:07 <JuliaMartin1ka1> in testnet = false fee is 0?
156 2012-09-16 16:57:56 <pingdrive> do i need to wait for the whole blockchain to download to send money?
157 2012-09-16 17:01:39 <otimm> i don't see any other way for the client to determine that you have sufficient funds that are not spent
158 2012-09-16 17:09:44 <pingdrive> so i do
159 2012-09-16 17:09:46 <pingdrive> ?
160 2012-09-16 17:09:52 <pingdrive> i know i have money
161 2012-09-16 17:09:53 <Diablo-D3> pingdrive: you read dmc thread?
162 2012-09-16 17:10:07 <pingdrive> yes
163 2012-09-16 17:10:18 <Diablo-D3> so the cuban missile crisis is over
164 2012-09-16 17:10:34 <pingdrive> well
165 2012-09-16 17:10:37 <pingdrive> maybe
166 2012-09-16 17:10:42 <pingdrive> its still open
167 2012-09-16 17:10:47 <pingdrive> and there is stink
168 2012-09-16 17:12:17 <pingdrive> Diablo-D3, the motion still pending though right?
169 2012-09-16 17:16:18 <pingdrive> i need to send money today and i gottta wait 24 more hours for block to download damn it
170 2012-09-16 17:18:13 <otimm> pingdrive: you could export the secret key and import in multibit, this client only looks at the last few thousand blocks. or import the secret key in a web based wallet and send from there
171 2012-09-16 17:19:57 <pingdrive> yeh probably wont happen thanks tho
172 2012-09-16 17:31:29 <Diablo-D3> pingdrive: its still pending, but it not might matter
173 2012-09-16 17:34:42 <JFK911> !tickers
174 2012-09-16 17:34:43 <gribble> Error: "tickers" is not a valid command.
175 2012-09-16 17:34:44 <JFK911> !ticker
176 2012-09-16 17:34:45 <gribble> Best bid: 11.7671, Best ask: 11.8675, Bid-ask spread: 0.10040, Last trade: 11.86541, 24 hour volume: 30235, 24 hour low: 11.67, 24 hour high: 11.99
177 2012-09-16 20:33:06 <Luke-Jr> ACTION wonders if it makes any performance difference in IBD, that we check BIP 30 exceptions every block
178 2012-09-16 20:33:08 <Luke-Jr> probably not
179 2012-09-16 20:42:53 <stamit> just read somewhere that the hashing algorithm can change. is that true?
180 2012-09-16 20:43:40 <stamit> like, the thing that gives the thing that you check if it starts with zeroes. didn't know that can change
181 2012-09-16 20:44:00 <eian> the thing with the thing!
182 2012-09-16 20:44:47 <Luke-Jr> stamit: it can change only if 100% of the Bitcoin users decide to accept the new software
183 2012-09-16 20:44:59 <Luke-Jr> stamit: where 100% is technically "people you want to pay with Bitcoin"
184 2012-09-16 20:49:42 <Luke-Jr> (so a few holdouts from idiots nobody wants to pay don't matter)
185 2012-09-16 20:51:03 <bdcs> Or derelict bitcoind nodes
186 2012-09-16 21:12:51 <knotwork> just woke up to find bitcoind claiming it needs to be upgraded
187 2012-09-16 21:13:25 <knotwork> it sometimes used to say that when data was corrupt so I killed it and restarted, it scanned chain ok, though seemed to do a re-org
188 2012-09-16 21:13:47 <knotwork> but rpc isnt working, the debug log though keeps saying rpc help is being called
189 2012-09-16 21:15:38 <knotwork> hmm now looks like its back to downloading chain weird
190 2012-09-16 21:16:20 <knotwork> "blocks" : 199113, well whatever that was its recovering itself maybe now
191 2012-09-16 21:48:35 <knotwork> dunno what that was but what the heck even though seemed working I have gone ahead and upgraded to latest from github anyway
192 2012-09-16 21:49:04 <knotwork> protocol 60002 now
193 2012-09-16 22:40:18 <matmar10> Hi all! I'm working on wrapping the MtGox REST API using Guzzle (a proper REST client library); I noticed a discrepancy in the MtGox docs regarding one of the 'private' API endpoints.
194 2012-09-16 22:40:34 <matmar10> Your trade history https://mtgox.com/api/1/BTCUSD/private/trades https://mtgox.com/api/1/BTCEUR/private/trades Returns all of your trades in this currency (BTCUSD, BTCEUR . . . ) . Does not include fees.
195 2012-09-16 22:41:16 <matmar10> Does anyone know what that endpoint *should* do? Right now it allows public GET and returns just a big block of trades.
196 2012-09-16 22:41:28 <matmar10> I'm happy to update the docs, but I need to know what it's supposed to do, first :-)
197 2012-09-16 22:43:18 <kjj_> I don't know if anyone here knows. you'd be better off asking the mtgox people