1 2013-03-21 00:00:01 <ashod> ok pastebin - first time hearing of it - great tool !!!
  2 2013-03-21 00:00:03 <ashod> does this work
  3 2013-03-21 00:00:04 <ashod> http://pastebin.com/K1BmGbVq
  4 2013-03-21 00:03:59 <ashod> did it work ?
  5 2013-03-21 00:04:37 <Eliel_> does bitcoind limit the attempts to unlock a locked wallet if they keep failing?
  6 2013-03-21 00:04:39 <BlueMatt> yes...so what is the point of this?
  7 2013-03-21 00:04:47 <BlueMatt> Eliel_: no
  8 2013-03-21 00:05:21 <ashod> what would be the best way to demo something like this - a screencast of it ? -
  9 2013-03-21 00:05:34 <BlueMatt> an explanation of use-cases
 10 2013-03-21 00:06:03 <ashod> i've never been good at getting across my idea with words -
 11 2013-03-21 00:08:13 <Luke-Jr> ashod: assume you've already explained what it does, and we ask: why should we care? :p
 12 2013-03-21 00:09:03 <ashod> it automates the rpc api , and builds new feature from this, - and gives access to these new features via a secondary api , which clients connect to-- so rather than connecting directly to bitcoind ,  you connect to this server, which in turn has persistant connections to the bitcoin,,
 13 2013-03-21 00:09:20 <ashod> what a stupid comment Luke-Jr -
 14 2013-03-21 00:09:26 <ashod> who the fuck are you
 15 2013-03-21 00:09:50 <bwen> my my, so defensive
 16 2013-03-21 00:10:09 <ashod> not really
 17 2013-03-21 00:11:04 <Luke-Jr> ashod: that's what it does, not why we should care.
 18 2013-03-21 00:12:00 <Eliel_> ashod: in other words, Luke's asking what's the point in doing all that. He wants the "why" not the "how".
 19 2013-03-21 00:12:24 <Luke-Jr> [01:04:57] <BlueMatt> an explanation of use-cases <-- heck, I'm just explaining BlueMatt's suggestion :p
 20 2013-03-21 00:13:14 <ashod> ok , i'll make a list of why i made this, and what it will achieve - will think about it
 21 2013-03-21 00:13:37 <bwen> usualy its the other way around...
 22 2013-03-21 00:15:27 <ashod> what do you mean bwen
 23 2013-03-21 00:16:33 <bwen> I make something because it serves a purpose.... it sounded like you made something and now you are trying to find a purpose for it...
 24 2013-03-21 00:18:04 <ashod> obviously - ,, , i knew why i made the thing, and what purpose it serves - i meant i'll make a list for you guys, rather than just talking about it -- as i said before im not too good at getting my ideas across to others
 25 2013-03-21 00:18:26 <bwen> oh aight, dont mind me. I'm a nobody :]
 26 2013-03-21 00:18:27 <ashod> why would anyone make something and then find a purpose for it ???
 27 2013-03-21 00:18:42 <bwen> exactly my though :]
 28 2013-03-21 00:21:32 <Eliel_> I made a simple layer myself that's kind of like that. It's purpose is to allow creating new addresses and monitoring transactions to and from them without allowing transfer of the coins from the same interface. Makes life more difficult for a hacker if one ever gets into the server :)
 29 2013-03-21 00:24:27 <phantomcircuit> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155497.msg1649038#msg1649038
 30 2013-03-21 00:24:31 <phantomcircuit> erhmm
 31 2013-03-21 00:25:01 <phantomcircuit> i know what he meant, anybody with half a brain knew what he meant, but someone is going to take that as an invitation to flood the mainnet with junk
 32 2013-03-21 00:27:35 <gmaxwell> someone should probably do NS3 support for bitcoin network simulation.
 33 2013-03-21 00:32:13 <ashod> ns3 ?
 34 2013-03-21 00:32:27 <Transisto> is there a bitcoid argument needed to get more than 8 connection ? (linux vps)
 35 2013-03-21 00:32:43 <sipa> Transisto: bitcoind will not make more than 8 outgoing connections; you don't need more
 36 2013-03-21 00:32:55 <sipa> Transisto: if you want more connections, make sure you're reachable on port 8333
 37 2013-03-21 00:33:02 <gmaxwell> Transisto: You will get more than 8 in total if you are accepting inbound connections, however.
 38 2013-03-21 00:33:16 <Transisto> I'm setting this up just trying to help spread the blockchain
 39 2013-03-21 00:33:26 <sipa> great
 40 2013-03-21 00:33:36 <Transisto> I tried with -listen
 41 2013-03-21 00:33:45 <sipa> is your port 8333 firewalled?
 42 2013-03-21 00:33:59 <ashod> what is ns3
 43 2013-03-21 00:34:26 <Transisto> I did python -m SimpleHTTPServer 8333  to confirm that connection goes through
 44 2013-03-21 00:35:00 <BlueMatt> Transisto: yes, but can someone not on your network connect to it?
 45 2013-03-21 00:35:34 <Transisto> to IP:8333 yes
 46 2013-03-21 00:36:34 <Transisto> on my network ? as I said, it's a VPS, and port 8333 is exposed
 47 2013-03-21 00:37:07 <sipa> Transisto: perhaps bitcoind is unable to determine its own IP address
 48 2013-03-21 00:37:12 <BlueMatt> ashod: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=ns3
 49 2013-03-21 00:37:15 <Transisto> possibly
 50 2013-03-21 00:37:17 <sipa> you can pass -externalip=IP
 51 2013-03-21 00:37:25 <sipa> to tell it how to announce itself
 52 2013-03-21 00:37:41 <BlueMatt> Transisto: on the other hand, did you wait a bit, because you wont get >8 instantly
 53 2013-03-21 00:38:48 <realazthat> hey, so I am trying to understand the script, and I'm looking at block 728, "scriptPubKey":"OP_DUP OP_HASH160 12ab8dc588ca9d5787dde7eb29569da63c3a238c OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG"
 54 2013-03-21 00:38:55 <realazthat> can someone walk me through what its doing?
 55 2013-03-21 00:39:11 <sipa> realazthat: this scripts is a standard pay-to-pubkeyhash script
 56 2013-03-21 00:39:30 <sipa> realazthat: it assumes two values are already on the stack: a signature and a public key
 57 2013-03-21 00:39:43 <sipa> so the initial stack is: <sig> <pubkey>
 58 2013-03-21 00:39:52 <sipa> OP_DUP duplicates the element on the top of the stack
 59 2013-03-21 00:40:03 <sipa> so you get: <sig> <pubkey> <pubkey>
 60 2013-03-21 00:40:03 <Transisto> @bluematt, if there is 1min delay from 0 to 8 it shouldnt take much more time to get to 9
 61 2013-03-21 00:40:25 <sipa> Transisto: someone has to connect to you; it takes a while before your IP gets broadcast to the network
 62 2013-03-21 00:40:33 <realazthat> sipa: wait, the signature is on the stack from the input that references it, but which public key is on the stack?
 63 2013-03-21 00:40:36 <sipa> Transisto: the first 8 are fast, as those are connections you initialize
 64 2013-03-21 00:40:43 <Transisto> Oh, I see
 65 2013-03-21 00:41:00 <sipa> Transisto: the pubkey whose hash is the address the output being spent was assigned to
 66 2013-03-21 00:41:07 <Transisto> I'll at least have it get all blocks
 67 2013-03-21 00:41:42 <sipa> realazthat: ok, next step is OP_HASH160
 68 2013-03-21 00:41:53 <sipa> which takes the top element and hashes it
 69 2013-03-21 00:42:03 <sipa> so the result is: <sig> <pubkey> <hash of pubkey>
 70 2013-03-21 00:42:05 <realazthat> sipa: right but this script *is* the public key field
 71 2013-03-21 00:42:12 <realazthat> thats why I am confused
 72 2013-03-21 00:42:15 <sipa> realazthat: forget that it is called scriptPubKey
 73 2013-03-21 00:42:24 <sipa> realazthat: this is historic, and mostly wrong now
 74 2013-03-21 00:42:26 <realazthat> ok
 75 2013-03-21 00:42:41 <sipa> call it scriptOutput and scriptSpend or so
 76 2013-03-21 00:42:53 <sipa> instead of scriptPubket and scriptSig
 77 2013-03-21 00:43:11 <realazthat> ok
 78 2013-03-21 00:43:11 <realazthat> so how does the stack initialize again
 79 2013-03-21 00:43:31 <sipa> realazthat: the spending script (the one in the txin, "scriptSig") does
 80 2013-03-21 00:43:44 <realazthat> right
 81 2013-03-21 00:43:48 <realazthat> I mean with what data
 82 2013-03-21 00:43:53 <sipa> what data?
 83 2013-03-21 00:44:02 <realazthat> <sipa> realazthat: it assumes two values are already on the stack: a signature and a public key
 84 2013-03-21 00:44:11 <realazthat> which "public key"
 85 2013-03-21 00:44:14 <sipa> yes, the input script puts it there
 86 2013-03-21 00:44:20 <sipa> so the spender does
 87 2013-03-21 00:44:36 <sipa> realazthat: when spending an output, you first execute the spending script, and then use the resulting stack as initial stack for executing the output script
 88 2013-03-21 00:44:49 <realazthat> ok
 89 2013-03-21 00:44:52 <realazthat> ok I get it
 90 2013-03-21 00:44:59 <realazthat> so you just run the script and let things happen
 91 2013-03-21 00:45:11 <sipa> next up: the 160-bit constant, which is the address the coin was assigned to
 92 2013-03-21 00:45:32 <sipa> so the resulting stack becomes: <sig> <pubkey> <hash of pubkey> <expected hash of pubkey>
 93 2013-03-21 00:45:49 <realazthat> ok
 94 2013-03-21 00:45:57 <realazthat> OP_EQUALVERIFY I get
 95 2013-03-21 00:46:00 <realazthat> takes 2 off the stack
 96 2013-03-21 00:46:05 <sipa> OP_EQUALVERIFY takes the two top elements of the stack, and if they are not equal, aborts with failure (making the script evaluation return invalid)
 97 2013-03-21 00:46:22 <sipa> so you have either <failure>, or <sig> <pubkey> left
 98 2013-03-21 00:46:34 <realazthat> ah I see here
 99 2013-03-21 00:46:53 <sipa> then there is OP_CHECKSIG which takes two elements of the stack, and validates whether they are a public key, and a valid signature for that public key
100 2013-03-21 00:47:02 <realazthat> so what its doing is (expecting that) including the public key together with the input?
101 2013-03-21 00:47:10 <realazthat> can't anyone spend this tx then?
102 2013-03-21 00:47:10 <sipa> yup
103 2013-03-21 00:47:19 <sipa> no, because you still need the signature
104 2013-03-21 00:47:24 <sipa> which needs the private key to create
105 2013-03-21 00:47:25 <realazthat> ah right
106 2013-03-21 00:47:36 <realazthat> ok, so now I understand this on a step-by-step
107 2013-03-21 00:47:43 <realazthat> but I still don't understand the point
108 2013-03-21 00:47:46 <sipa> the original reason for this was simply because public keys were 65 bytes
109 2013-03-21 00:47:47 <realazthat> like what does this do
110 2013-03-21 00:47:59 <sipa> and satoshi wanted shorter addresses
111 2013-03-21 00:48:17 <sipa> so this mechanism allows 160-bit hashes of public keys, and still be able to spend them
112 2013-03-21 00:48:34 <realazthat> ah hmm
113 2013-03-21 00:48:41 <realazthat> interesting, I'll have to think on it
114 2013-03-21 00:48:46 <sipa> so it simply means the sender doesn't need to know the full public key
115 2013-03-21 00:49:27 <realazthat> tyvm
116 2013-03-21 00:49:37 <realazthat> hmm
117 2013-03-21 00:49:45 <realazthat> so how do I figure out a bitcoin address for this
118 2013-03-21 00:50:09 <sipa> it's the base58check encoded form of 12ab8dc588ca9d5787dde7eb29569da63c3a238c (which is in hex)
119 2013-03-21 00:50:19 <realazthat> ok
120 2013-03-21 00:50:26 <realazthat> what about some unconventional arbitrary script
121 2013-03-21 00:50:37 <realazthat> how would one compute the bitcoin address then
122 2013-03-21 00:50:41 <sipa> there isn't one
123 2013-03-21 00:50:44 <realazthat> ok
124 2013-03-21 00:50:53 <sipa> a bitcoin address is a template for a particular set of script
125 2013-03-21 00:51:01 <sipa> not every script matches such a template
126 2013-03-21 00:51:08 <realazthat> is it this and the regular, or are there more in the set
127 2013-03-21 00:51:18 <realazthat> (and where can I find this convention)
128 2013-03-21 00:51:26 <sipa> there are only two types of addresses defined right now
129 2013-03-21 00:51:32 <sipa> send-to-pubkey-hash (like this one)
130 2013-03-21 00:51:49 <sipa> and send-to-script-hash (see BIP13 and BIP16)
131 2013-03-21 00:52:21 <realazthat> ok cool
132 2013-03-21 00:52:23 <realazthat> ty for your time
133 2013-03-21 00:52:53 <gmaxwell> realazthat: addresses are not fundimental to the bitcoin system??? they're UI frosting, effectively.
134 2013-03-21 00:53:04 <gmaxwell> realazthat: the blockchain itself has no concept of addresses.
135 2013-03-21 00:53:17 <realazthat> right, I think thats why I said convention
136 2013-03-21 00:54:18 <Transisto> How long should I expect my # of connection to pass the 8 stage ?  maybe someone can addnode 206.253.166.38 ?
137 2013-03-21 00:54:47 <BCB> andy help for this error on a failed bitcoind
138 2013-03-21 00:54:48 <BCB> ERROR: FetchInputs() : f04f336462 mempool Tx prev not found 9ac6f20ce0
139 2013-03-21 00:54:48 <BCB> stored orphan tx f04f336462 (mapsz 51)
140 2013-03-21 00:54:50 <gmaxwell> Transisto: it won't go over 8 until you are mostly caught up with the chain.
141 2013-03-21 00:55:01 <gmaxwell> Transisto: and then it should rapidly go up.
142 2013-03-21 00:55:14 <gmaxwell> BCB: thats not a 'real' error.
143 2013-03-21 00:55:20 <Transisto> Reasuring thanks
144 2013-03-21 00:55:30 <BCB> gmaxwell, it says "error"
145 2013-03-21 00:55:34 <BCB> gmaxwell, what is it
146 2013-03-21 00:55:56 <muhoo> exception, sounds like
147 2013-03-21 00:56:03 <gmaxwell> BCB: Yes, it says error. But it just means you've recieved a transaction which spends transactions you node doesn't know about.
148 2013-03-21 00:56:17 <gmaxwell> Thats all.. and thats expected, especially for a node that was recent started.
149 2013-03-21 00:56:41 <gmaxwell> (FetchInputs failing while validating a block is another matter entirely)
150 2013-03-21 00:56:43 <BCB> gmaxwell, makes sense.  Looks like its catching up
151 2013-03-21 00:56:45 <BCB> Thanks
152 2013-03-21 01:47:47 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
153 2013-03-21 01:47:48 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
154 2013-03-21 01:47:49 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
155 2013-03-21 01:47:50 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
156 2013-03-21 01:47:51 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
157 2013-03-21 01:48:02 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
158 2013-03-21 01:48:03 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
159 2013-03-21 01:48:04 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
160 2013-03-21 01:48:05 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
161 2013-03-21 01:48:06 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
162 2013-03-21 01:48:07 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
163 2013-03-21 01:48:08 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
164 2013-03-21 01:48:09 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
165 2013-03-21 01:48:10 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
166 2013-03-21 01:49:11 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
167 2013-03-21 01:49:12 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
168 2013-03-21 01:49:13 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
169 2013-03-21 01:49:14 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
170 2013-03-21 01:49:15 <ahrehewahgwe> [30 Bitcoin only$699.99] [40 Bitcoin only$899.99] [50 Bitcoin only$1099.99] http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com
171 2013-03-21 01:53:58 <norn> hi guys, can somebody help me with BC API? I can't find any method to unveal the return address of the transaction. For example I like to return spare change back to the user, how I can get his address?
172 2013-03-21 01:54:22 <norn> if he previously payed to me
173 2013-03-21 01:55:26 <Luke-Jr> norn: you can't, Bitcoin doesn't have "from" addresses
174 2013-03-21 01:55:33 <Luke-Jr> nor return addresses
175 2013-03-21 01:55:40 <BlueMatt> (yet)
176 2013-03-21 01:55:48 <Luke-Jr> gavin's been working on a payment protocol to handle negotiating that
177 2013-03-21 01:56:37 <norn> but what about satoshi dice? it returns bitcoins back if win?
178 2013-03-21 01:56:56 <norn> how do they do it?
179 2013-03-21 01:57:24 <Luke-Jr> SatoshiDice is "how to do everything wrong and attack Bitcoin at the same time"
180 2013-03-21 01:57:36 <Diablo-D3> norn: SD sometimes DOES return the money to he wrong person
181 2013-03-21 01:58:15 <doublec> norn: see https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=138752.0
182 2013-03-21 01:58:27 <doublec> norn: that explains why you shouldn't do it, but also covers how you can do it
183 2013-03-21 01:59:04 <norn> i am not going t make satishidice clone (just to chill), but I am working on service which will return money back to sender if not all the money were used in some time interval
184 2013-03-21 01:59:39 <Diablo-D3> norn: just ask them for their address and give them a unique address for them to send the money to
185 2013-03-21 01:59:39 <norn> doublec, thx! I'll check
186 2013-03-21 02:00:17 <doublec> norn: Diablo-D3's approach is the better one though
187 2013-03-21 02:00:35 <doublec> norn: unless you like to handle support requests like "why haven't I got my money, is it lost?"
188 2013-03-21 02:00:42 <BlueMatt> best is to wait until payment protocols are done
189 2013-03-21 02:00:56 <norn> Diablo-D3, I agree, it's the simplest solution, but I wondering If I can avoid filling one more form
190 2013-03-21 02:01:20 <Diablo-D3> not with how bitcoin works currently
191 2013-03-21 02:01:26 <Diablo-D3> and its also how people expect it to work
192 2013-03-21 02:01:29 <gfawkes> if i had some excess btc's i'd play some SD just to reward the creation of SD.
193 2013-03-21 02:03:43 <BlueMatt> which bitcoind thread starts and stops every ~30 seconds and only runs for <<1 second?
194 2013-03-21 02:04:25 <norn> it seems like asking for the return address is the best solution for the moment... thanks for help guys!
195 2013-03-21 02:32:39 <BlueMatt> poll: should dnsseeds reject <0.8.0 after the block switch, and should they reject 0.8.0 now?
196 2013-03-21 02:39:51 <gmaxwell> BlueMatt: yes, after. Now??? uh. No, because 0.8 will happily give the right chain if its longer??? and if its not longer we have much bigger problems.
197 2013-03-21 02:40:15 <BlueMatt> well, yea...ok
198 2013-03-21 02:42:13 <dermoth_> Hi there
199 2013-03-21 02:42:22 <dermoth_> Is there some doc about the private keys with compressed pubkey? something like https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Wallet_import_format would be great
200 2013-03-21 02:42:42 <dermoth_> for the K & L keys
201 2013-03-21 02:44:03 <dermoth_> they seem to decode the same way (according to checksum validation), but the decoded string is longer so I guess there is more processing afterwards
202 2013-03-21 03:04:30 <muhoo> wow, fireduck is like bitcoin's own _why http://img.1209k.com/00000000000000/hhtt-diagram-full.jpg
203 2013-03-21 03:06:43 <dermoth_> I dont see any cold storage in there...
204 2013-03-21 03:08:42 <phantomcircuit> muhoo, that is a comically over designed system that i suspect would actually fair fairly regularly
205 2013-03-21 03:11:16 <dermoth_> the guy couldn't find slush's Stratum implementation so he wrote his own? Good for him if he got time for that... :)
206 2013-03-21 03:13:37 <jrmithdobbs> ha
207 2013-03-21 03:13:37 <jrmithdobbs> phantomcircuit: i pretty much agree with exactly what you said
208 2013-03-21 03:14:00 <jrmithdobbs> that doesn't look all that interesting
209 2013-03-21 03:14:06 <jrmithdobbs> but it'll work!
210 2013-03-21 03:17:24 <dermoth_> now I'm trying to recover from the fuchsia background on some 1209k.com pages - looking at it wasn't hard, however getting back to white is quite painful
211 2013-03-21 03:18:51 <dermoth_> heck, now I'm waking up. Why is he using SNS to push to SQS?!?
212 2013-03-21 03:27:07 <doublec> dermoth_: for the guaranteed delivery. If it gets to SNS but SQS is down it'll keep retrying even if miner shuts down.
213 2013-03-21 03:45:37 <dermoth_> doublec, and what guaranteed you SNS availability? SQS is already supposed to be HA... whenever you use SQS or SNS, if the endpoint is down your messages won't be accepted. And although it shouldn't happen, if you can't connect for some reason you can always save the message locally and grab it when the endpoint is back up...
214 2013-03-21 03:47:13 <dermoth_> actually I do see a use for that, it's yo usre SNS as a "management" layer for your queues.
215 2013-03-21 03:47:54 <dermoth_> but nothing you can't do by changing the code/config on the application directly
216 2013-03-21 03:50:41 <doublec> dermoth_: I didn't design the system but I imagine there is one SQS but many SNS. So the miner uses the SNS local to them. If it goes down they use the other SNS.
217 2013-03-21 03:53:26 <dermoth_> yeah that's true, otherwise you'd have one SQS per region with the backend pulling from each region. I still think it could be quite easy to manage...
218 2013-03-21 03:54:15 <dermoth_> I grant him from an artistic point of view, the current design looks better ;)
219 2013-03-21 03:54:21 <doublec> haha
220 2013-03-21 04:00:57 <jgarzik> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=49417.msg1650972#msg1650972
221 2013-03-21 04:01:06 <jgarzik> <BTC Guild> At this time, I am not sure if Litecoin will be officially added.  After dealing with botnets this week, I'm cautious about adding Litecoin, which is about to become botnet heaven as a result of ASICs drastically raising the Bitcoin difficulty.  Once botnets realize Bitcoin isn't worth their time due to post-ASIC difficulty, you can be sure they're going to swarm Litecoin like locusts since it was designed a
222 2013-03-21 04:01:06 <jgarzik> s CPU (BOTNET) friendly.
223 2013-03-21 04:01:20 <jgarzik> 
ACTION made the same prediction

224 2013-03-21 04:03:01 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: for a really substantial part of litecoin's early life it was significantly power unprofitable to mine litecoin??? I'd assumed that was due to botnets mining on free power.... though its more fashionable to speculate that it was early gpu miners driving up the difficulty.
225 2013-03-21 04:06:00 <warren> gmaxwell: the current litecoin pools are ddos attacked every week, it seems.
226 2013-03-21 04:06:27 <gmaxwell> warren: that was the case a year ago for bitcoin
227 2013-03-21 04:06:33 <warren> ah
228 2013-03-21 04:10:41 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: did you see my charts before on reorg sizes under different block selection policy? Made a bigger difference than I expected.
229 2013-03-21 04:10:57 <Transisto> is there a modified bitcoind version that is optimised for high ressource dedicated nodes ?
230 2013-03-21 04:11:40 <Transisto> after ~5 hours I only have 17 connections
231 2013-03-21 04:12:21 <gmaxwell> Transisto: no, but if you really do have high resources you can crank up your max connection count some.
232 2013-03-21 04:12:48 <gmaxwell> Transisto: I expect a good chunk of that 5 hours was pulling the chain, it doesn't announce itself until after it has pulled the chain.
233 2013-03-21 04:13:08 <gmaxwell> 17 sounds a bit low, though if you're in a /16 with many other nodes you won't get as many connections.
234 2013-03-21 04:13:16 <gribble> Error: "," is not a valid command.
235 2013-03-21 04:13:16 <Transisto> I think it's 125 by default, setting it to 1000 ,,, I guess it'll improve over time
236 2013-03-21 04:13:24 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: it sounded like artificial scenario of two 50% miners ping-ponging, consistently making blocks within 10 seconds of each other.  If that is an accurate summary, did not seem applicable to real world.
237 2013-03-21 04:13:38 <jgarzik> i.e. astronomically unlikely
238 2013-03-21 04:13:40 <gmaxwell> Transisto: you probably shouldn't set it quite that high. You'll run yourself out of file descriptors.
239 2013-03-21 04:15:27 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: No. It's an accurate simulation of two nodes with the normal 10 minute exponentially distributed block gaps, with 30 seconds of delay (latency, miner response, block processing, etc) between the two nodes.
240 2013-03-21 04:15:33 <Transisto> good thanks,,, I was so tired of having to close my client everytime for cause of 100% upload utilisation.  Hope someone manage to add upload throttleing soon
241 2013-03-21 04:15:34 <gribble> Error: "," is not a valid command.
242 2013-03-21 04:17:01 <gmaxwell> jgarzik: I'd simulate with more nodes, but its actually a huge pain in the ass to write code for and I probably wasted 45 minutes just on the two.
243 2013-03-21 04:18:26 <gmaxwell> Transisto: I'm confused! if you're trying to prevent resource utilization you should be disabling listening not increasing your connection count!
244 2013-03-21 04:19:22 <Transisto> I was wondering if my desktop couln't handle the thing, maybe the network would benefits from a VPS node
245 2013-03-21 04:26:23 <jgarzik> gmaxwell: stalemate, then.  :)  Moving on.
246 2013-03-21 04:26:29 <jgarzik> SD now requires a confirmation?
247 2013-03-21 04:26:31 <jgarzik> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77870.msg1636243#msg1636243
248 2013-03-21 04:32:13 <[Tycho]> We don't need to place "/P2SH/" in the coinbase anymore ?
249 2013-03-21 04:35:05 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: not AFAICT
250 2013-03-21 04:35:13 <gmaxwell> [Tycho]: nope, no need to now.
251 2013-03-21 04:35:18 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: are you implementing v2 blocks?
252 2013-03-21 04:35:51 <[Tycho]> My blocks are already v2. Is there something wrong with it ?
253 2013-03-21 04:37:31 <doublec> [Tycho]: http://blockorigin.pfoe.be says they aren't
254 2013-03-21 04:38:11 <doublec> [Tycho]: this is showing a v1 block 000000000000015f5319495f81a6ca0c2e5afcc58b025e9554b7ce70a71e652d
255 2013-03-21 04:38:22 <doublec> [Tycho]: but is one of yours?
256 2013-03-21 04:38:27 <[Tycho]> https://blockexplorer.com/rawblock/0000000000000254360830fa83d93abc8dd32258dd9128df70ad8b9e52c9bf0a
257 2013-03-21 04:39:03 <[Tycho]> I switched tonight.
258 2013-03-21 04:39:29 <[Tycho]> I was the last one to do so ?
259 2013-03-21 04:40:56 <doublec> ah ok, makes sense
260 2013-03-21 04:41:04 <doublec> [Tycho]: some pools are still producing them
261 2013-03-21 04:41:12 <doublec> [Tycho]: you might be enough to push it to a majority
262 2013-03-21 04:41:37 <[Tycho]> Also, as I see now, blockorigin shows some of my blocks as "Unknown"
263 2013-03-21 04:43:21 <doublec> [Tycho]: I think they delay stats
264 2013-03-21 04:43:28 <doublec> kinlo would know
265 2013-03-21 04:45:10 <[Tycho]> Good.
266 2013-03-21 04:46:10 <[Tycho]> I received two e-mails from some random persons asking about v2 blocks, so it seems that someone is making some PR somewhere...
267 2013-03-21 04:47:14 <doublec> most of the v1 blocks are coming from pools getwork/merge mining servers. A couple have plans to shut them down. When that happens the 95% will probably hit.
268 2013-03-21 04:47:24 <doublec> which would have been bad for deepbit if they were still on v1
269 2013-03-21 04:47:56 <[Tycho]> I tried to check blockchain.info, but they have no chart on this matter :)
270 2013-03-21 04:49:54 <jgarzik> [Tycho]: Thanks for handling the issue.  Deepbit was the last of the Big Boys to be producing v1 blocks, I think.
271 2013-03-21 04:50:07 <doublec> I was making a mistake with my v2 coinbase's and they were invalid. The 75% switch on for that validation rule burnt me.
272 2013-03-21 04:50:33 <jgarzik> doublec: off-by-one?
273 2013-03-21 04:50:55 <doublec> jgarzik: no, my merge mining code was putting the blockheight in in some circumstances
274 2013-03-21 04:51:19 <doublec> I messed up a merge at some point and just carried it through
275 2013-03-21 04:51:23 <[Tycho]> Namecoins are mostly abandoned ?
276 2013-03-21 04:51:37 <doublec> [Tycho]: there's a few diehard supporters :)
277 2013-03-21 04:52:02 <doublec> jgarzik: erm, "not" putting the blockheight in I mean
278 2013-03-21 04:52:15 <[Tycho]> That was a nice idea. The only altcoins that make sence.
279 2013-03-21 04:53:10 <doublec> There's still development discussion going on about it. I think it's just idling at the moment though.
280 2013-03-21 04:53:43 <[Tycho]> I wonder who did this with USD/BTC rate...
281 2013-03-21 04:54:39 <[Tycho]> Also, it's a sad thing that DB layer causes interoperation problems.
282 2013-03-21 04:55:52 <doublec> yes. good demonstration of how such situations can be dealt with though.
283 2013-03-21 04:56:28 <gmaxwell> [Tycho]: interestingly it turns out that the bitcoinj full node support had a vaguely similar problem too.
284 2013-03-21 04:56:51 <gmaxwell> (in that case the database layer has timeouts and sufficiently large reorgs trigger them)
285 2013-03-21 04:57:10 <[Tycho]> 
ACTION lost lots of blocks because of the reorg.

286 2013-03-21 04:58:10 <[Tycho]> I did some experiments with switching from BDB to another database, but if there will be some incompatible bugs it will cause problems again. No fun :(
287 2013-03-21 05:02:00 <keystroke> [Tycho] which pool do you run?
288 2013-03-21 05:02:21 <[Tycho]> :)
289 2013-03-21 05:02:23 <[Tycho]> Deepbit
290 2013-03-21 05:02:45 <keystroke> cool :)
291 2013-03-21 05:02:51 <keystroke> wow so you switched to version 2.. excellent
292 2013-03-21 05:02:53 <[Tycho]> I need to regain some hashrate share or everyone will forget me :)
293 2013-03-21 05:03:07 <keystroke> if BTC Guild stops non-stratum it should put us over to v2 i guess
294 2013-03-21 05:03:08 <keystroke> haha
295 2013-03-21 05:03:23 <keystroke> yea what ever caused your hashrate to drop?
296 2013-03-21 05:03:38 <keystroke> you run 0.3.x?
297 2013-03-21 05:05:10 <[Tycho]> keystroke: I think it may be related to "ASIC compatibilty" PR of other pools.
298 2013-03-21 05:05:16 <[Tycho]> Yes.
299 2013-03-21 05:05:26 <doublec> keystroke: ozcoin is stopping theirs on the weekend
300 2013-03-21 05:05:35 <keystroke> why such an old version [Tycho]?
301 2013-03-21 05:05:45 <[Tycho]> keystroke: why not ?
302 2013-03-21 05:06:03 <keystroke> it confuses the graphs on https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposures# :P
303 2013-03-21 05:06:36 <[Tycho]> It's heavily customized and backported patches are applied.
304 2013-03-21 05:06:52 <keystroke> haha yea i figured :)
305 2013-03-21 05:07:15 <keystroke> nah was just curious, makes sense with all the customization
306 2013-03-21 05:08:00 <[Tycho]> Maybe I'll switch to my own node software.
307 2013-03-21 05:08:59 <doublec> are there any miners that don't use bitcoind at all?
308 2013-03-21 05:09:14 <[Tycho]> Yes, surely.
309 2013-03-21 05:09:46 <keystroke> wasn't there one that didn't include transactions for awhile?
310 2013-03-21 05:09:46 <[Tycho]> I mean just pool users, not pool owners :)
311 2013-03-21 05:09:58 <keystroke> although that could have been modified bitcoind...
312 2013-03-21 05:26:50 <[Tycho]> "830 out of the latest 1000 blocks on version 2 (83.00%)" - looks like Deepbit is not enough for supermajority :):)
313 2013-03-21 05:33:47 <realazthat> hey, so I am writing a bitcoin-script emulator, I am wondering if there are test scripts I can run it on
314 2013-03-21 05:34:46 <kerum> scripts related to what?
315 2013-03-21 05:34:54 <realazthat> er
316 2013-03-21 05:34:59 <realazthat> the scripts that are part of the protocol
317 2013-03-21 05:35:35 <kerum> try testnet
318 2013-03-21 05:35:58 <kerum> jgarzik ^^
319 2013-03-21 05:36:16 <sivu> i think realaz is looking for suite of testscripts for unittesting
320 2013-03-21 05:36:18 <gmaxwell> realazthat: the unit tests in bitcoin include many tests, and there are many mined into the testnet chain.
321 2013-03-21 05:36:29 <realazthat> oh ok cool
322 2013-03-21 05:36:36 <realazthat> I'll check both of them out
323 2013-03-21 05:36:50 <realazthat> is there a blk download for the testnet somewhere?
324 2013-03-21 05:38:32 <kerum> start bitcoind with -testnet
325 2013-03-21 05:39:02 <realazthat> where does the data go
326 2013-03-21 05:39:13 <sivu> own folder
327 2013-03-21 05:39:16 <kerum> in your datadir
328 2013-03-21 05:39:52 <kerum> in /bitcoin/testnet3
329 2013-03-21 05:40:00 <kerum> or something...
330 2013-03-21 05:40:03 <realazthat> ok
331 2013-03-21 05:40:09 <realazthat> I'll figure it out, ty
332 2013-03-21 05:40:13 <kerum> np
333 2013-03-21 05:59:02 <realazthat> kerum: any hint on how large the testnet is?
334 2013-03-21 05:59:18 <sivu> not very
335 2013-03-21 05:59:44 <sivu> 61270 blocks
336 2013-03-21 06:01:00 <realazthat> yeah but how much does that translate to in bytes
337 2013-03-21 06:01:05 <realazthat> prolly small blocks?
338 2013-03-21 06:01:44 <sivu> <100megs
339 2013-03-21 06:02:33 <realazthat> ok cool
340 2013-03-21 06:14:50 <realazthat> ok so I am trying to figure out OP_CHECKSIG
341 2013-03-21 06:15:10 <realazthat> I am reading https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_CHECKSIG#How_it_works
342 2013-03-21 06:15:18 <realazthat> "The sig is deleted from subScript."
343 2013-03-21 06:15:34 <realazthat> is that as crazy as it sounds ? :P
344 2013-03-21 06:16:02 <realazthat> do I just find/replace it?
345 2013-03-21 06:30:35 <eeeee> aa
346 2013-03-21 06:31:06 <eeeee> a
347 2013-03-21 06:31:31 <muhoo> it's a stack
348 2013-03-21 06:32:51 <ashod> what
349 2013-03-21 07:13:15 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
350 2013-03-21 07:13:16 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
351 2013-03-21 07:13:17 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
352 2013-03-21 07:13:18 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
353 2013-03-21 07:13:19 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
354 2013-03-21 07:13:20 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
355 2013-03-21 07:13:21 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
356 2013-03-21 07:13:22 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
357 2013-03-21 07:13:23 <bfshbrehre> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
358 2013-03-21 07:13:32 <jrmithdobbs> shut up
359 2013-03-21 07:15:08 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
360 2013-03-21 07:15:09 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
361 2013-03-21 07:15:10 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
362 2013-03-21 07:15:11 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
363 2013-03-21 07:15:12 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
364 2013-03-21 07:15:13 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
365 2013-03-21 07:15:14 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
366 2013-03-21 07:15:16 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
367 2013-03-21 07:15:16 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
368 2013-03-21 07:15:30 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
369 2013-03-21 07:15:31 <fdsaghewaghew> http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days http://bitcointalk.wordpress.com/ 50 Bitcoin only$1099 last days
370 2013-03-21 07:16:15 <Nothing4You> hey there, is there a reason (other than just nobody implemented it yet) why bitcoin-qt doesn't have a copy txid in the context menu in tx overview?
371 2013-03-21 07:18:01 <weex> Nothing4You: probably not
372 2013-03-21 07:18:12 <weex> can't imagine that option would be overly confusing
373 2013-03-21 07:19:02 <Nothing4You> i think i'll write a pullreq later then
374 2013-03-21 07:19:04 <[Tycho]> Yes, copying tx hash would be gread
375 2013-03-21 07:19:07 <[Tycho]> *t
376 2013-03-21 07:19:44 <Diablo-D3> are we getting a lot of blocks recently?
377 2013-03-21 07:20:05 <Nothing4You> looks like it
378 2013-03-21 07:20:16 <[Tycho]> I like blocks.
379 2013-03-21 07:20:35 <weex> 7 in 24 minutes
380 2013-03-21 07:21:52 <Diablo-D3> lol Im watching the blockchain.info live feed
381 2013-03-21 07:21:59 <Diablo-D3> sd, sd, sd, sd, sd....
382 2013-03-21 07:22:09 <Nothing4You> did you really expect something else?
383 2013-03-21 07:22:21 <weex> Diablo-D3: you jelly bro?
384 2013-03-21 07:22:30 <jrmithdobbs> Diablo-D3: DP, DP, DP, DP, DP...
385 2013-03-21 07:22:32 <jrmithdobbs> get it right
386 2013-03-21 07:22:37 <Diablo-D3> weex: of what?
387 2013-03-21 07:22:39 <Diablo-D3> jrmithdobbs: lol
388 2013-03-21 07:22:58 <weex> Diablo-D3: not your service
389 2013-03-21 07:23:10 <Diablo-D3> weex: also not my prison time.
390 2013-03-21 07:23:15 <weex> heh
391 2013-03-21 07:24:23 <zebedee_> We're going to > 6m difficulty without hitting anything in the 5millions it looks like.
392 2013-03-21 07:25:19 <zebedee_> Simplified payment verification: this is a little vague in the whitepaper, but the use case is looking to see if a payment has been received right? Like a merchant would do.  It's not about knowing if that payment has since been respent, correct?
393 2013-03-21 07:31:33 <weex> zebedee_: spv is supposed to be a node that doesn't use the entire blockchain to validate a transaction but can still fully validate
394 2013-03-21 07:34:16 <realazthat> nvm, I think this (https://en.bitcoin.it/w/images/en/7/70/Bitcoin_OpCheckSig_InDetail.png) explains it pretty well
395 2013-03-21 07:42:07 <zebedee_> weex: Really?  What would the procedure be, on receiving a new block then?  You need to check all prior inputs, say N of them across the block.  Are you saying we request N merkle branches from the network?  How do we know that those inputs haven't been double-spent a few blocks earlier?
396 2013-03-21 07:43:15 <zebedee_> Reading the paper I think the intent is for a merchant to verify that a payment to him has happened.  I'm not 100% sure though.
397 2013-03-21 07:46:14 <zebedee_> Or is the idea that merkle branches are always pruned, so if it were double spent there would no longer be a merkle branch to it?
398 2013-03-21 07:46:29 <Diablo-D3> did some giant farm turn on somewhere?
399 2013-03-21 07:47:06 <Diablo-D3> 6 blocks in the past 14 minutes
400 2013-03-21 07:48:48 <zebedee_> Diablo-D3: short-term there isn't a block space problem :)  It's deferred for a few weeks....
401 2013-03-21 07:57:02 <cads> does BTC value strongly correlate with hash rate?
402 2013-03-21 07:57:39 <Diablo-D3> no.
403 2013-03-21 07:59:09 <cads> Diablo-D3: since when do yes or no answers get credit?
404 2013-03-21 07:59:26 <Diablo-D3> since when do I care about credit?
405 2013-03-21 07:59:27 <cads> Diablo-D3: -1
406 2013-03-21 07:59:36 <cads> Diablo-D3: -2 :P
407 2013-03-21 07:59:46 <cads> since always :)
408 2013-03-21 07:59:55 <cads> humans always do.
409 2013-03-21 08:00:31 <ashod> is there a wyay to get the details of a transaction by index ?
410 2013-03-21 08:02:59 <cads> Diablo-D3: heh, though I did mean to ask that question in #bitcoin proper
411 2013-03-21 08:03:00 <ashod> anyone ?
412 2013-03-21 08:03:06 <cads> -3s himself :(
413 2013-03-21 08:03:08 <weex> neither difficulty nor mtgox price are historical secrets, tell us what you find
414 2013-03-21 08:03:13 <jrmithdobbs> cads: the market has actually been completely antithetical to hash power increases many times in the past
415 2013-03-21 08:03:16 <jrmithdobbs> so his answer was correct
416 2013-03-21 08:03:24 <jrmithdobbs> whether you like the brevity or not
417 2013-03-21 08:03:58 <cads> jrmithdobbs: do we know what the asics will mean for the value of the BTC?
418 2013-03-21 08:04:14 <cads> (takes this to #bitcoin)
419 2013-03-21 08:04:20 <jrmithdobbs> they will have little to no direct effect would be my prediction
420 2013-03-21 08:04:27 <jrmithdobbs> but anything re: that is pure speculation until it happens
421 2013-03-21 08:05:18 <ashod> is there a way using the api to get the details of say, the 132,333th transaction that happened on bitcoin since the first transaction ?
422 2013-03-21 08:06:10 <jrmithdobbs> no
423 2013-03-21 08:06:21 <ashod> jrmithdobbs - is that no to me ?
424 2013-03-21 08:07:06 <lianj> is there a blk0002.dat like Luke-Jr did for 1
425 2013-03-21 08:09:01 <ashod> so is there a way ?
426 2013-03-21 08:10:10 <lianj> no
427 2013-03-21 08:10:32 <ashod> why not ?
428 2013-03-21 08:10:44 <lianj> why would you need it
429 2013-03-21 08:11:55 <ashod> for logging , anything -
430 2013-03-21 08:11:59 <ashod> why isnt it possible ?
431 2013-03-21 08:12:26 <lianj> its possible. its just not in there because its not needed and useless
432 2013-03-21 08:13:14 <ashod> it might be useful for someone else -
433 2013-03-21 08:13:24 <ashod> so do you know how it's possible ? -
434 2013-03-21 08:13:48 <ashod> how would you go about finding out,  how many bitcoins were transferred for transaction #1832323
435 2013-03-21 08:14:16 <lianj> where this this going? its useless
436 2013-03-21 08:15:07 <lianj> transaction have an id. its stupid to reference them by index
437 2013-03-21 08:15:18 <ashod> why are you saying it's useless -
438 2013-03-21 08:15:32 <ashod> it's kind of arrogant
439 2013-03-21 08:15:43 <lianj> haha
440 2013-03-21 08:15:51 <lianj> just say a use for it
441 2013-03-21 08:16:45 <ashod> how do you know what app someone wants to build one day , and what is needed for it - how can you fortell something is useless - it's bizzare
442 2013-03-21 08:17:09 <ashod> anyway - do you know how to ? - just for arguments sake.. -
443 2013-03-21 08:17:48 <ashod> ok here is a use
444 2013-03-21 08:18:00 <lianj> how to get the tx index of a tx in the mainchain?
445 2013-03-21 08:19:04 <ashod> a historical log of every transaction that happens on bitcoin in sequential order,, and one day for legal reasons, someone needs to know what transaction amount was placed..
446 2013-03-21 08:19:34 <ashod> ok have you heard , that once someone sold a pizza for 10,000 btc on bitcoin ? - i read this somewhere
447 2013-03-21 08:20:17 <lianj> once its in a block, the tx is ordered in that block, blocks itself are ordered aswell, not hard to make this (still useless) global tx index value
448 2013-03-21 08:20:35 <ashod> fuck -
449 2013-03-21 08:20:39 <ashod> again with the useless
450 2013-03-21 08:21:09 <cads> hey guys, could we do this for the biggest accounts in the block tree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_02QGsHzEQ
451 2013-03-21 08:21:23 <lianj> for bitcoind it is. if you want to implement it in your own software go ahead. step all blocks, and all txs in it. index values done
452 2013-03-21 08:21:58 <cads> ie, could we use a system of smart particles to animate the history of the BTC network and its transactions?
453 2013-03-21 08:23:37 <cads> gource itself is gpl'ed, so it may be possible to use a variation of its existing metaphor to visualize out own data.
454 2013-03-21 08:24:16 <cads> I think it would be gorgeous, and not impossible to code
455 2013-03-21 08:24:46 <kermit_> unbelievable
456 2013-03-21 08:24:49 <kermit_> 66.5
457 2013-03-21 08:25:26 <ashod> 66.5 ? - not good
458 2013-03-21 08:26:25 <ashod> it needs to come down, otherwise bitcoin might die before it ever really takes off
459 2013-03-21 08:26:45 <weex> bitcoin might die??!1
460 2013-03-21 08:26:46 <cads> ashod: why?
461 2013-03-21 08:26:53 <weex> how do we save it!
462 2013-03-21 08:27:28 <weex> ashod: sell all your coins. it's the only way.
463 2013-03-21 08:27:46 <cads> ashod: you mean people might permanently distrust bitcoin after this bubble bursts, instead of a forever free money yielding cycle of boom and bust perpetual motion?!
464 2013-03-21 08:28:03 <weex> -dev is turning into #bitcoin
465 2013-03-21 08:28:09 <cads> yeah it's terrible
466 2013-03-21 08:28:26 <weex> what does price have to do with development?
467 2013-03-21 08:28:33 <cads> I try to ask an actual coding question and people are quoting stuff :)
468 2013-03-21 08:28:47 <ashod> nothing, technically its a masterpiece
469 2013-03-21 08:31:06 <iwilcox> Perhaps there needs to be an invite-only to get rid of fuckwits like me, or a #bitcoin-no-really-dev
470 2013-03-21 08:40:21 <digitalmagus> hi.
471 2013-03-21 08:40:22 <digitalmagus> Hey how can I view the content of the blockchain file? It's not clear text
472 2013-03-21 08:40:41 <digitalmagus> I'm using linux, when I tail, it's all gobedygook (sp?)
473 2013-03-21 08:40:58 <[Tycho]> What do you want to see ?
474 2013-03-21 08:41:06 <digitalmagus> network hash rates
475 2013-03-21 08:41:09 <digitalmagus> over time
476 2013-03-21 08:42:16 <kermit_> !ticker
477 2013-03-21 08:42:17 <gribble> BTCUSD ticker | Best bid: 66.67191, Best ask: 66.99000, Bid-ask spread: 0.31809, Last trade: 66.99000, 24 hour volume: 91526.57284089, 24 hour low: 58.80000, 24 hour high: 66.99000, 24 hour vwap: 63.57816
478 2013-03-21 08:42:22 <peawormsworth> digitalmagus: u prob want to read this: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Original_Bitcoin_client/API_calls_list.
479 2013-03-21 08:42:36 <digitalmagus> Ah need to API ok. Thanks.
480 2013-03-21 08:42:46 <kermit_> hey thanks
481 2013-03-21 08:42:50 <kermit_> API thing
482 2013-03-21 08:43:17 <kermit_> can someone point me to the process where bitcoin aquires node, I am trying to find it in the wiki and the source
483 2013-03-21 08:43:29 <kermit_> acuires p2p node,
484 2013-03-21 08:43:52 <kermit_> I am putting together  a cheat sheet
485 2013-03-21 08:44:14 <peawormsworth> iwilcox: I think ur idea is ideal. there should be a channel for users of the software and merchant programmers (software users), because #bitcoin is too chatty. And this is specific to development.
486 2013-03-21 08:44:30 <peawormsworth> something in the middle of bitcoin and bitcoin-dev
487 2013-03-21 08:45:31 <iwilcox> Ultimately it's just a casualty of Bitcoin's popularity.  If you can't ask questions for the noise, you'll try the quieter channel.  Perhaps more channels just doesn't help.
488 2013-03-21 08:46:24 <iwilcox> I reckon -dev should just voice only people who've contributed, and there should be -tech
489 2013-03-21 08:46:30 <kermit_> I think the nature of IRC is just what it is
490 2013-03-21 08:46:33 <iwilcox> My $0.02
491 2013-03-21 08:46:39 <epscy> !tickeruk
492 2013-03-21 08:46:39 <gribble> BTCGBP ticker | Best bid: 44.68357, Best ask: 45.36276, Bid-ask spread: 0.67919, Last trade: 45.36276, 24 hour volume: 2611.80553072, 24 hour low: 39.50000, 24 hour high: 45.36953, 24 hour vwap: 43.36164
493 2013-03-21 08:46:47 <epscy> look at that spread
494 2013-03-21 08:46:56 <kermit_> volatile
495 2013-03-21 08:46:57 <epscy> nearly 70p
496 2013-03-21 08:47:54 <kermit_> How does bitcoin bootstraps the looup of p2p network nodes?
497 2013-03-21 08:48:06 <epscy> kermit_: several methods
498 2013-03-21 08:48:22 <epscy> dns, some hard coded addresses of nodes
499 2013-03-21 08:49:59 <peawormsworth> kermit_: there is some good discussion from a developer of bitcoin here: http://omegataupodcast.net/2011/03/59-bitcoin-a-digital-decentralized-currency/
500 2013-03-21 08:49:59 <peawormsworth> There is basic discussion of that process in the podcast.
501 2013-03-21 08:56:06 <kermit_> epscy, I know, I read about it once
502 2013-03-21 08:56:14 <kermit_> thanks peawormsworth
503 2013-03-21 08:56:21 <kermit_> thanks epscy
504 2013-03-21 08:58:58 <peawormsworth> kermit_: I opened a channel #bitcoin-tech. Im welcome any questions about using bitcoind or bitcoin-qt or other stuff like merchant integration.
505 2013-03-21 08:59:26 <peawormsworth> I warn u that I know next to nothing, but Im interesting in learning with anyone who wants to post questions there.
506 2013-03-21 09:05:04 <kermit_> I dont like that link
507 2013-03-21 09:06:27 <kermit_> I am not interested in a keynesian viewpoint of bitcoin from some coolaidrinker, I was asking for how the BC client bootstraps and finds p2p nodes
508 2013-03-21 09:10:19 <peawormsworth> kermit_: ur mistaken about the viewpoints in that talk. but i do have additional info for u over in #bitcoin-tech channel.
509 2013-03-21 09:11:53 <kermit_> peawormsworth: lets restrict this to coding, i am seriously not interested in being schooled (lol) in economics
510 2013-03-21 09:13:09 <kermit_> Can someone bootstrap me and point me a link (whatever) on how the clients finds p2p nodes?
511 2013-03-21 09:15:53 <grazs> kermit_: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Satoshi_Client_Node_Discovery have you read this?
512 2013-03-21 09:18:07 <kermit_> Thanks, that might be what i was looking for
513 2013-03-21 09:19:43 <kermit_> I am interested in IRC bootstrapping,...,
514 2013-03-21 09:19:59 <kermit_> but the network used (quake, freenode ) is not listed
515 2013-03-21 09:20:53 <jouke> kermit_: irc bootstrapping is disabled by default in the latest clients afaik
516 2013-03-21 09:21:18 <kermit_> ok
517 2013-03-21 09:21:28 <kermit_> i can read
518 2013-03-21 09:21:33 <kermit_> but is it still used?
519 2013-03-21 09:22:13 <jouke> If you can read, open that linked irc.cpp and search for the server that it connects to
520 2013-03-21 09:22:25 <jouke> and if you can read, read the configuration options.
521 2013-03-21 09:22:54 <kermit_> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Network#Bootstrapping
522 2013-03-21 09:25:00 <kermit_> Its clear
523 2013-03-21 09:25:02 <kermit_> CService addrConnect("92.243.23.21", 6667); // irc.lfnet.org          CService addrIRC("irc.lfnet.org", 6667, true);
524 2013-03-21 09:25:10 <kermit_> irc.lfnet.org
525 2013-03-21 09:31:22 <iwilcox> Guess you could join those channels and see.
526 2013-03-21 09:31:39 <iwilcox> I expect old clients are still using it just fine to get peers.
527 2013-03-21 09:35:06 <iwilcox> http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/charts/branches.html
528 2013-03-21 09:35:26 <iwilcox> ~3% using versions with the IRC code still present.
529 2013-03-21 09:37:01 <kermit_> iwilcox thanks
530 2013-03-21 09:38:07 <kermit_> nice chart, where did you get that data?
531 2013-03-21 09:38:29 <kermit_> how is it possible to acquire this info, it is from the blockchain?
532 2013-03-21 09:39:12 <iwilcox> It's Luke-Jr's work.  I'm guessing he just raises the minimum number of peers to sillyhigh.  Clients announce version upon connect.
533 2013-03-21 09:39:41 <iwilcox> Could be wrong, it might just be the distribution in the eligius pool.
534 2013-03-21 09:39:46 <kermit_> iwilcox, so you are saying Luke-jr tried to sample the network to get some feel for statistics
535 2013-03-21 09:40:00 <kermit_> by connectiong to a shitload of nodes
536 2013-03-21 09:40:06 <iwilcox> You'd have to ask him, but it's the best statistic I've seen so far on client versions.
537 2013-03-21 09:41:18 <kermit_> mmm,  it looks nice, but does it refelct "reality" in some way?
538 2013-03-21 09:41:33 <kermit_> ok will do,
539 2013-03-21 09:43:53 <kermit_> How do I get in contact with luke jr?
540 2013-03-21 09:44:18 <kinlo> he's on irc
541 2013-03-21 09:44:22 <Nothing4You> it's Luke-Jr, wait for him to be here and then ask him
542 2013-03-21 09:44:56 <kinlo> anyway
543 2013-03-21 09:44:57 <Diablo-D3> yeah
544 2013-03-21 09:45:00 <jouke> Luke-Jr is useing some sort of crawler to gather that information.
545 2013-03-21 09:45:02 <Diablo-D3> hes usually here
546 2013-03-21 09:45:05 <kinlo> clients sent their "version"package
547 2013-03-21 09:45:10 <kinlo> packet*
548 2013-03-21 09:45:16 <kermit_> ok
549 2013-03-21 09:45:18 <kinlo> which is distributed trough the entire p2p network
550 2013-03-21 09:45:26 <kinlo> so each node knows about every other node
551 2013-03-21 09:45:38 <kermit_> so
552 2013-03-21 09:45:45 <kermit_> let me get this straight
553 2013-03-21 09:45:48 <kinlo> it's then stored in the peers.dat file, so if you restart the client, it has a huge database of clients to connect to
554 2013-03-21 09:46:13 <kermit_> all nodes in the network know about (or try to know) all other nodes in the network
555 2013-03-21 09:46:15 <kermit_> all  of them
556 2013-03-21 09:46:23 <kinlo> that's basicly how every p2p program works, there is no central server to connect to, you just need to try a few old nodes to see which ones are still online
557 2013-03-21 09:46:37 <kinlo> so to do so, you store all nodes in a file
558 2013-03-21 09:47:02 <kermit_> ok,.., I did study on torrent network, but it was only possible to know neighbours via torrents
559 2013-03-21 09:47:21 <kinlo> kermit_: torrents are completly different, they have a central server (the tracker)
560 2013-03-21 09:47:32 <Nothing4You> DHT is without tracker
561 2013-03-21 09:47:37 <kermit_> ok...
562 2013-03-21 09:47:46 <kinlo> yes but DHT can be bootstrapped by using a tracker
563 2013-03-21 09:47:59 <kermit_> yes yes
564 2013-03-21 09:48:02 <kinlo> in any case, it's better to compare it with something like gnutella or something
565 2013-03-21 09:48:11 <kermit_> but bitcoin works differently?
566 2013-03-21 09:48:21 <kermit_> it just knows all the nodes
567 2013-03-21 09:48:28 <kermit_> ?
568 2013-03-21 09:48:36 <kinlo> yep, it just knows and uses that list to try to reconnect to the network
569 2013-03-21 09:48:50 <kinlo> there are some bootstrap methods such as irc if it has no list
570 2013-03-21 09:49:03 <kermit_> this is very cool, so the network cannot be balcanized or parts hidden
571 2013-03-21 09:49:05 <kinlo> but that's only for initial connecting to the network
572 2013-03-21 09:49:13 <kermit_> by having some pathways disconnect
573 2013-03-21 09:49:17 <kermit_> very cool, ok
574 2013-03-21 09:49:18 <kinlo> the network has hidden nodes
575 2013-03-21 09:49:35 <kinlo> you can configure your node not to transmit it's ip/version to other nodes
576 2013-03-21 09:49:58 <kinlo> so you will need to set up your connections manually in that case
577 2013-03-21 09:50:05 <kinlo> but that's the exeption rather then rule
578 2013-03-21 09:50:32 <kermit_> kinlo, aha, ok, so your node not transmitting ip/version would make it not relay new blocks etc etc
579 2013-03-21 09:50:43 <kinlo> so luke's numbers are by definition wrong, as it does contain those nodes
580 2013-03-21 09:51:05 <kinlo> kermit_: relaying blocks is not relevant here, a hidden node can still relay blocks
581 2013-03-21 09:51:19 <kinlo> as it does not* contain those nodes
582 2013-03-21 09:51:20 <kermit_> yes indeed, I just thought of that
583 2013-03-21 09:51:27 <kermit_> disjoint functionality
584 2013-03-21 09:51:31 <kinlo> but in any case, those hidden nodes - there aren't many of them
585 2013-03-21 09:52:05 <kermit_> how do you know if a node is hidden, because it refuses to reveil its  version?
586 2013-03-21 09:52:12 <kinlo> the only difference between those nodes and regular nodes is that people will not connect to those hidden nodes by themselves, and you will need to make sure they are connected manually
587 2013-03-21 09:52:14 <kermit_> thats the indicator?
588 2013-03-21 09:52:48 <kermit_> hidden nodes dont have incomming connections
589 2013-03-21 09:52:48 <kinlo> it wont broadcast on the network "I'm here" basicly
590 2013-03-21 09:52:53 <kermit_> that much is cler
591 2013-03-21 09:52:59 <kermit_> ok,..,
592 2013-03-21 09:53:05 <kermit_> clear*
593 2013-03-21 09:53:26 <kinlo> hidden nodes can have incomming connections, you will just have to configure another node to connect to it, coz the network doesn't know about it and will not connect to it manually
594 2013-03-21 09:53:31 <kinlo> eh
595 2013-03-21 09:53:33 <kinlo> automatically*
596 2013-03-21 09:53:40 <kinlo> what's up with my typing today :p
597 2013-03-21 09:53:47 <kermit_> on faCE value i must say, this is a very robust setup
598 2013-03-21 09:54:14 <kinlo> anyway, forget the hidden nodes, that's only used for stuff like hot wallets, by a minority
599 2013-03-21 09:54:48 <kermit_> I will copy paste that word "hot wallets" will look into that later
600 2013-03-21 09:55:46 <kermit_> Thanks for your concern, I would love to speak with Luke-jr about the code he made to generate that chart,.., I gues via ip you could find location of these nodes
601 2013-03-21 09:57:06 <kinlo> oh, just a term to indicate that if you have an automated system that gives bitcoins to users, you will not keep all coins on the server so in case of a hack you won't loose all coins.  you store the bulk of coins offline, in a "cold" wallet, and keep a few coins on the server in a "hot" wallet so the server can work as it should, except when a large amount of coins need to be transferred
602 2013-03-21 11:25:54 <Sealy> devs, i'd appreciate any input: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=155935.0
603 2013-03-21 11:26:13 <Sealy> surely somebody has already done this ^ (listing nodes by country/territory)
604 2013-03-21 11:30:26 <Graet> http://blockchain.info/nodes-globe like that?
605 2013-03-21 11:30:30 <Graet> or less flashy?
606 2013-03-21 11:30:31 <Graet> :)
607 2013-03-21 11:30:41 <Sealy> yeah i linked that in my post Graet
608 2013-03-21 11:30:48 <Graet> ahh ok :)
609 2013-03-21 11:30:51 <Sealy> just a list i can throw into excel would be good
610 2013-03-21 11:30:59 <Sealy> thats exactly what i'm after but yeah in table format
611 2013-03-21 11:31:14 <Graet> :)
612 2013-03-21 11:31:44 <Graet> they have a nodes log, but its not got location info listed
613 2013-03-21 11:32:28 <Sealy> usually they get the IP address and find a location using that
614 2013-03-21 11:32:50 <Sealy> so the best would be some kind of nodes log with geo ip location tag and sorted by city/country
615 2013-03-21 11:44:24 <Ant0> I have an idea
616 2013-03-21 11:44:27 <Ant0> that may be awesome
617 2013-03-21 11:44:33 <Ant0> a flood protection system
618 2013-03-21 11:44:50 <Ant0> to avoid flooding the btc network (ermm shitosi dice)
619 2013-03-21 11:44:59 <Ant0> :D
620 2013-03-21 11:45:31 <sipa> how would it work?
621 2013-03-21 11:45:58 <Ant0> limit the number of transactions per second/minute
622 2013-03-21 11:46:12 <sipa> there are several such limits already
623 2013-03-21 11:46:21 <Ant0> if that number is passed by say X percent, make the transaction being delayed like a week
624 2013-03-21 11:46:39 <sipa> some specific for free transactions, some implicit by block space, some using bitcoindaysdestroyed as a measure
625 2013-03-21 11:46:43 <Ant0> that way satoshi dice will build up a eons queue
626 2013-03-21 11:47:33 <sipa> but so will everyone else
627 2013-03-21 11:48:41 <Ant0> make it only affect when a single address sends/receive too many times, would be that possible?
628 2013-03-21 11:49:17 <BTCOxygen> Anyone saw [Tycho] lately ?
629 2013-03-21 11:50:23 <kermit_> mining pools
630 2013-03-21 11:50:31 <kermit_> !ticker
631 2013-03-21 11:50:32 <gribble> BTCUSD ticker | Best bid: 67.43036, Best ask: 67.76999, Bid-ask spread: 0.33963, Last trade: 67.76999, 24 hour volume: 101885.07812485, 24 hour low: 59.00000, 24 hour high: 68.90583, 24 hour vwap: 64.20841
632 2013-03-21 11:50:36 <kermit_> oh shit
633 2013-03-21 11:50:40 <kermit_> wrong channel
634 2013-03-21 11:50:41 <kermit_> ))
635 2013-03-21 11:50:45 <kinlo> BTCOxygen: sure, he's active enough
636 2013-03-21 12:02:24 <BTCOxygen> kinlo: yep
637 2013-03-21 12:02:30 <BTCOxygen> kinlo: But not on IRC
638 2013-03-21 12:02:46 <kinlo> he's been on irc
639 2013-03-21 12:10:47 <pete92> Sealy: http://blockchain.info/ip-log the source has approx. lat/long values
640 2013-03-21 12:13:52 <Sealy> nice pete92 now were talking...
641 2013-03-21 12:14:05 <Sealy> is there an easy way to extract that list without having to scroll through each page?
642 2013-03-21 12:14:07 <pete92> Sealy: or this may be easier (not paged) http://blockchain.info/connected-nodes
643 2013-03-21 12:14:27 <Sealy> i saw that already but its only the current nodes which limits my dataset quite a lot
644 2013-03-21 12:14:42 <Sealy> the first link you sent has a record of 1.6mill unique ip addresses
645 2013-03-21 12:14:52 <Sealy> if i could get my hands on that then it would be awesome
646 2013-03-21 12:17:28 <pete92> ah yes - well you can get each page from ip-log easily http://blockchain.info/ip-log/0 0-15 on the end
647 2013-03-21 12:17:41 <pete92> but that isn't 1.6m records..
648 2013-03-21 12:18:24 <Sealy> i count 50 rows per page
649 2013-03-21 12:20:22 <Sealy> http://blockchain.info/ip-log/32773
650 2013-03-21 12:20:24 <Sealy> thats the last page
651 2013-03-21 12:20:41 <Sealy> at 50 records per page thats 1.6mill records
652 2013-03-21 12:20:55 <Sealy> hmmm that'll take a lot of time scripting something out to request every page
653 2013-03-21 12:21:43 <iwilcox> As soon as you go down that route you're writing code to get around the fact that you're not writing code.
654 2013-03-21 12:21:56 <iwilcox> Take the client and hack around.
655 2013-03-21 12:22:23 <Sealy> but the client will only give me current nodes?
656 2013-03-21 12:22:26 <pete92> ah
657 2013-03-21 12:22:29 <Sealy> and yes, agreed iwilcox
658 2013-03-21 12:22:51 <Sealy> i was hoping not to have to script anything as it seems like a generic enough request, surely somebody has wanted this information before
659 2013-03-21 12:23:03 <iwilcox> Appreciated.
660 2013-03-21 12:23:26 <iwilcox> Everyone has their limit on avoiding reinventing the wheel.
661 2013-03-21 12:23:50 <Sealy> hmmm damnit, any devs willing to code it up, if nobody replies to my post in a day or so then i'll happily put up a bounty and pay someone
662 2013-03-21 12:26:04 <iwilcox> Heh, don't *tell* people that
663 2013-03-21 12:26:32 <iwilcox> Do it for free today, or bounty tomorrow.  I pick....umm....
664 2013-03-21 12:33:35 <doublec> BTCOxygen: he was here a couple of hours ago